Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-03-17 CC Packet• AGENDA STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL March 17, 1992 REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular & Recessed Meetings - March 4, 1992. STAFF REPORTS INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS 1. Jack Evert - Discussion of Regulation of City Owned Land. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a Variance request to the_Parking Ordinance to convert a residential use to an office use on the second story of a structure located at 226 E. Myrtle St. in the CBD, Central Bus. Dist.; Case No. V/92 -7, James & Katherine Anderson, Applicants. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on March 5, 1992 and mailed to affected property owners. 2. This is the day and time for the consideration of the making of improvements for L.I. 282, Green Twig Way, including sanitary sewer, watermain, streets, storm sewer and all appurtenances located northeasterly of Eagle Ridge Trail, northerly of the Minneapolis -St. Paul abandoned suburban railway & south of Eagle Ridge Lane, adjacent to the sanitary sewer easement for the Oak Glen area and McKusick Lake. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on March 5 & March 12, 1992 and mailed to affected property owners. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Council Final Position on New St. Croix River Bridge (Resolution). NEW BUSINESS 1. Request from Arthur Palmer, Lowell Inn, for additional TIF funds and City Utility Assistance. 2. On -site Septic System Approval for Single Family Residence at 2285 Orwell Ct., Case No. SS /92 -1. 3. Possible First Reading of an Ordinance Forbidding the Possession of Tobacco by Children. 4. Possible First Reading of an Ordinance Requiring Connection to Storm Sewer. • 5. Report on Metro Waste Control Commission I/I Study Results. 6. Set Special Meeting for March 24, 1992 - Discussion with Stillwater Yacht Club and Stillwater Dock Ass'n. 7. Designation of Councilmembers as Representatives of the Various Wards. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS (Continued) CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution Directing Payment of Bills (Resolution No. 92 -47) 2. Applications (List to be supplied at meeting). 3. Set Public Hearing date of April 8, 1992 for the following Planning Cases: a. Case No. V/92 -8 - Variance to the Sign Ordinance for the placement of a 16 ft. by 8 ft. internally illuminated sign, 22 ft. in height located at 1902 So. Greeley St. in the BP -I, Bus. Pk.- Indus. Dist., Stillwater Knights of Columbus Hall, Applicant. b. Case No. SUP /92 -9 - Special Use Permit to conduct a mini -golf course on a commercial lot located at 501 No. Main St. in the CBD, Central Bus. Dist., Mark Haberman, Applicant. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS STAFF REPORTS (Continued) COMMUNICATIONS /REQUESTS 1. John Diers, MTM - Discussion of possible annexation of portion of railroad right -of -way in Stillwater Township. 2. Cory C. Mohan - Opinion on Annexation of portion of Stillwater Township. 3. J. C. Pfeiffer, St. Croix Area United Way - Organizational Fee for Use of Lowell Park. 4. AMM - Legislative Contact Alert regarding Governor's Budget Proposal. 5. LMC Action Alert - Governor's Proposal for Drastic Cuts in City LGA. QUESTIONS /COMMENTS FROMINEWS MEDIA ADJOURNMENT Possible Executive Session to Discuss Labor Relations Negotiations. 2 STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING March 4, 1992 4:00 P.M. The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Abrahamson. Present: Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim (arrived qt 4:37 P.M.) and Mayor Abrahamson. Absent: None Also Present: City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson Finance Director Deblon Consulting Engineer Peters Traffic Engineer Van Wormer City Planner Pung - Terwedo Comm. Dev. Director Russell Public Works Director Junker Police Captain Beberg Parking Enforcement Officer Mahr Public Safety Director Mawhorter Building Official Zepper City Clerk Johnson • Press: Julie Kink, The Courier Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette Others: Parking Task Force Committee (Dave Anderson, Dick Chilson, John Bourdaghs, Cooie Mellen, Karl Ranum, Paul Simonet, Dick Slachta, Dave Swanson) 1. WORKSHOP WITH PARKING TASK FORCE The Council met with the Parking Task Force to discuss problems with signage and use of loading zones in the Downtown area. Police Chief Mawhorter explained the problems being experienced with loading zone designations. He explained the mission of the Committee was to provide the most economical viable parking situation and enforce the laws fairly. He stated that Parking Enforcement Office Mahr is interpreting the loading zone rule literally. Discussion followed regarding the use of loading zones and whether to create them in other areas. Also discussed were signing issues and decisions on who has the authority to change the signs and under what conditions. Ms. Mahr stated the biggest problem has been the loading zones and explained her policy regarding this. To date, she has not ticketed, but has issued warning tickets. • 1 Stillwater City Council Minutes March 4, 1992 Regular Meeting Paul Simonet gave his explanation of the loading zones behind Simonet's Furniture. He stated that their vehicles come and go all day and sometimes a semi - trailer comes in with a load of furniture. They have to have a loading zone and to keep it open for their use, they park a couple cars in those spots. Karl Ranum stated the present ordinance does not address the problems and some specific policies should be developed. The types of parking zones should be differentiated, making it fair and putting these zones on a restricted time -frame except for those with special needs, such as Simonet's. Dick Chilson stated the problem could be solved with new signage. He suggested a 30- minute sign. He also asked where the "No Parking Here to Corner" sign will be placed on Main St. Engineer Van Wormer discussed the number of parking spots on Main St. south of Chestnut St. by saying that the State has cut some of the spots designated in that area. Mr. Van Wormer will check with Mn /DOT on the spaces allowed and request to have those spaces put back into the plan. (Councilmember Opheim arrived at 4:37 P.M.) City Attorney Magnuson stated he is getting calls from individuals who say they have been unfairly ticketed, because the signage is not adequate. The loading zone in 'front of Stillwater Bakery was discussed. Dave Swanson stated the American Legion could use an A.M. loading zone. He would like to see a plan for parking signage. John Bourdaghs stated the new sidewalks are bad and it was noted that they will be fixed. Mr. Van Wormer stated that when the signing and parking plans were drafted, there was a lot of citizen input. The committee at that time stated that one of their goals was to minimize the number of signs. After the pavement signage is in place, the present situation will be alleviated. It was noted that Council and Staff will develop a policy after the Downtown is completed with signage in place and loading zones will be strictly enforced. STAFF REPORTS 1. Finance Director - Utility Bill Adjustments 2 • • • Stillwater City Council Minutes . March 4, 1992 Regular Meeting Motion by Councilmember Farrell, seconded by Councilmember Bodiovick to approve the request for two utility bill adjustments. (All in favor). 2. Police Chief - No Report. 3. Public Works Director - Mr. Junker reported that the sewer project on Fourth and Wilkins Streets has been completed except for landscaping and the new manhole on Fifth and Wilkin Streets has been installed. Also, the Mulvihill problem is being taken care of on Myrtle St. Promotion of Rick Nordquist Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke to adopt the appropriate resolution promoting Rick Nordquist to Sewer Maintenance Worker, contingent on his obtaining an S -B Certificate. (Resolution No. 92 -41) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodiovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None • 4. Community Development Director - No Report. 5. Consulting Engineer - Mr. Peters reported on the Downtown Project and various jobs that are being completed. 6. Building Official - No report. 7. City Attorney - Cancellation of Lease for Mulberry Point Mr. Magnuson reported on the progress of City action regarding the cancellation of the lease for use of Mulberry Point. He reviewed the history of that property as it relats to City use. Council requested Mr. Magnuson to outline the issues and where the City stands on this item. 8. City Clerk - New Ward Boundaries Ms. Johnson presented a map outlining the new Ward boundaries recently adopted by the Charter Commission. Designation of Single Polling PLace for Presidential Primary Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to adopt the appropriate resolution designating the First United Methodist Church as a • 3 Stillwater City Council Minutes March 4, 1992 Regular Meeting single polling place for the City of Stillwater in the Presidential Primary Election on April 7, 1992. (Resolution No. 92 -40) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None Designation of Election Judges Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke to adopt the appropriate resolution designating Election Judges for the Presidential Primary on April 7, 1992. (Resolution No. 92 -37) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 9. City Coordinator - Contract for Building Inspector Services Motion by CouncilmemberiBodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to adopt the appropriate resolution approving the Building Inspector Service Contract with Washington County. (Resolution No. 92 -42) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None RECESS Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Funke to recess the meeting at 5:25 P.M. (All in favor). ATTEST: CITY CLERK MAYOR Resolutions: No. 92 -37 - Designation of Election Judges for Presidential Primary. No. 92 -40 - Designation of Single Polling Place for Presidential Primary. No. 92 -41 - Promotion of Rick Nordquist to Sewer Maintenance Worker. No. 92 -42 - Agreement with Washington Co. for Building Inspector Services. 4 • • • • • RECESSED MEETING Absent: None Also Present: STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 4, 1992 City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson Consulting Engineer Peters Comm. Dev. Director Russell Water Board Manager McKean City Clerk Johnson 1 7:00 P.M. The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Abrahamson. Present: Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Press: Julie Kink, The Courier Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette Mark Herwig, St. Croix Valley Press Others: Dr. Don Keys, Greg Johnson, Mr. & Mrs. Johnson, Don Valsvik, Kevin LaCasse, Marvin Sjobeck. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Funke to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 18, 1992 as presented. (All in favor). INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS 1. Recognition of "Link -Up" Program and Presentation of Proclamation to Greg Johnson. Mayor Abrahamson introduced Dr. Don Keys, who explained the Link -up Program which works with young people by raising self - esteem and trying to avert suicide. Council commended and presented a proclamation to Greg Johnson, who has been working with the Link -up Program by providing peer help for young people. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a Special Use Permit for the placement of a 4 ft. wide, 250 ft. long, permanent dock at 2021 No. Lake St. located in the RB, Two - Family Residential Dist., Bluffland /Shoreland /Flood Plain Dist., Case No. SUP /92 -5, Marvin D. Sjobeck, Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on February 20, 1992 and mailed to affected property owners. Stillwater City Council Minutes March 4, 1992 Recessed Meeting Mr. Russell explained that the site for this request is in the Bluffland /Shoreland District and a permit is also required by the DNR. There were no adverse comments made at the Planning Commission meeting. The owner has stated he has no objections to the conditions. Mayor Abrahamson closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to approve a Special Use Permit for the placement of a 4 ft. wide, 250 ft. long, permanent dock at 2021 No. Lake St. located in the RB, Two - Family Residential Dist., Bluffland /Shoreland /Flood Plain Dist., Case No. SUP /92 -5, as conditioned; Marvin D. Sjobeck, Applicant. (All in favor). 2. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a Variance and Special Use Permit to construct a 22 ft. by 40 ft. warehouse /garage with a zero sideyard setback located at 204 No. Third St. in the PA, Public, Admin. /Office Dist., Case No. V /SUP /92 -3, Dennis McKean, Secretary, Board of Water Commissioners, Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on February 20, 1992 and mailed to affected property owners. Mr. Russell summarized the request for removal of an old storage building and replacement with a new, larger building. The Design Review Committee wanted to make sure that the removal of the existing building is necessary. They requested that the dormers be replaced on the new structure. The Planning Commission did not feel the dormers were necessary. Trinity Lutheran Church had some concerns regarding drainage for the rear part of the church. Don Valsvick, representing the church, requested the emergency exists at the rear of the church be kept clear during construction. Dennis McKean, representing the Water Board agreed to this provision, but did not think the drainage issue Should be a condition of approval. Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to approve a Variance and Special Use Permit to construct a 22 ft. by 40 ft. warehouse /garage with a zero sideyard setback located at 204 No. Third St. in the PA, Public, Admin. /Office Dist., Case No. V /SUP /92 -3, as conditioned with the removal of Condition No. 4 for the requirement of dormers; Dennis McKean, Manager, Board of Water Commissioners, Applicant. (All in favor). 3. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a request for a 5 ft. by 128 ft. Street Vacation for a portion of Alder St. between Highway 95 and Lake St. located in the RB, Two - Family Residential Dist., Bluffland /Shoreland Dist., Case No. SV/92 -4, Daniel Challeen & Deborah Desteno, Applicants. 2 • • • Stillwater City Council Minutes • March 4, 1992 Recessed Meeting Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on February 20, 1992 and mailed to affected property owners. Mr. Russell explained the street vacation is being requested because the existing house is partially in the right -of -way. It has been reviewed by City departments for comment -- there are no utilities in the area and no plans to widen the street. The request was referred to the City Engineers and a survey is presently being done for a legal description. Mayor Abrahamson closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Funke to adopt the appropriate resolution approving a request for a 5 ft. by 128 ft. Street Vacation for a portion of Alder St. between Highway 95 and Lake St. located in the RB, Two - Family Residential Dist., Bluffland /Shoreland Dist., Case No. SV/92 -4, contingent on receiving a legal description of the property; Daniel Challeen & Deborah Desteno, Applicants. (Resolution No. 92 -43) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None • NEW BUSINESS 1. Request by JDB Floral Shop for a permanent 15- minute parking space near their shop on Main St. Council tabled the request of JDB Floral Shop for a permanent 15- minute parking space near their shop on Main St. until all Downtown signage is complete and also referred the request to the Consulting Engineers for their comment. 2. Resignation of Police Chief Mawhorter Councilmember Farrell, on behalf of the Council, thanked Chief Mawhorter for his years of service and in directing a professional department. Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to accept Police Chief Mawhorter's resignation with regret. (All in favor). 3. Appointment of Captain Don Beberg as Acting Police Chief Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to adopt the appropriate resolution appointing Donald Beberg as Acting Police Chief, for 90 days, commencing March 16, 1992. (Resolution No. 92 -44) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 4. Appointment of Sergeant Tim Bell as Acting Police Captain • 3 Stillwater City Council Minutes March 4, 1992 Recessed Meeting Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to adopt the appropriate resolution appointing Tim Bell as Acting Police Captain, for 90 days, commencing March 16, 1992. (Resolution No. 92 -45) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 5. Authorization to Hire One Patrolman in Police Dept. Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke to authorize Acting Police Chief Beberg to proceed in the selection of one patrolman for employment with the City with consideration of the eligibility list. (All in favor). PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS (continued) 1. Discussion of Liquor Referendum Kevin LaCasse, owner of the Grand Garage, was present to request that a Liquor Referendum be included on the Presidential Primary ballot on April 7. City Clerk Johnson stated the election is only one month away which does not permit enough time to have Absentee Ballots printed and presented to the County Election Office for dispersal. Further discussion included the possibility of a split license for the Grand Garage and the possibility of a Liquor Referendum with the State Primary Ballot in September. The City Attorney will research this issue. CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Funke to approve the Consent Agenda of March 4, 1992, including the following: (All in favor). 1. Directing Payment of Bills (Resolution No. 92 -35). Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 2. Contractor's Licenses. Kraus - Anderson Construction Co. General Contractor 5300 -39th Ave. So. Minneapolis, Mn. 55417 W. Zintl, Inc. General Contractor New 3030 Granada Ave. No. Oakdale, Mn. 55128 4 Renewal 3. Request for renewal of Gambling Permits for Brine's & Madcapper Restaurants by St. Croix Valley Hockey Ass'n. COMMUNICATIONS /FYI • • • Stillwater City Council Minutes • March 4, 1992 Recessed Meeting • 1. Jeanne M. Anderson - Request to schedule Public Hearing on Variance for property at 226 E. Myrtle St. for March 17, 1992. Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke to set a public hearing for March 17 on a requested Variance for property located at 226 E. Myrtle St., James & Katherine Anderson, Applicants. (All in favor). 2. Glen Medbury, et al - Comments on the moving of a house to location at 4th & Pine Streets. Mr. Russell explained that the house now sits across the street near 5th St. and will either be demolished or removed as part of the building program for St. Mary's Church. Further discussion included moving permits and a City lien against the property in the amount of $35,000. No action was taken. 3. John Diers, Minn. Transportation Museum - Suspension of scheduled operation of MTM Train for 1992. Council took note of this communication. 4. Dorothy & Vernard Haas - Comments on New Bridge being built in Southern Corridor. Council noted this letter. 5. Dan McGuiness, Mn /Wisc. Boundary Area Comm. - Meeting in Council Chambers on April 2, 1992 to discuss a Special Project being started on the Lower St. Croix. Council noted this letter. 6. LMC - Legislative Conference March 24, 1992; and Legislative Policy Committees. Council took note of this communication. 7. LMC - Possible Revocation of 1/2 Cent Sales Tax and its Impact on Cities. Council took special note of this item and will contact their Legislators. 8. Lakeview Memorial Hospital - Announcement of Expansion plans. Council noted these plans. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS State Forecast of Budget Shortfalls Mayor Abrahamson presented this report and discussion followed regarding the actions the State may take to balance the budget. Mayor Abrahamson initiated a short discussion of the dilemma of a citizen regarding development of property located on Co. Rd. 5 across from Brooks Superette which contains a small pond and who is having some problems with • 5 Stillwater City Council Minutes March 4, 1992 Recessed Meeting the Army Corps of Engineers. He will request the Consulting Engineers to research this problem. Suggestion for Making Nelson St. a One -Way Street Councilmember Funke asked Council to give consideration to making Nelson St. a one -way street going east. It was stated that the Engineers, Downtown Plan Committee and City Staff should review this suggestion. STAFF REPORTS (continued) 1. City Coordinator - Security Improvements to Pioneer Park Bandshell Motion by Councilmember IBodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to accept the quote of Geo. Olsen Construction Co. for the installation of a metal door at the Pioneer Park Bandshell at an approximate cost of $1,500. (All in favor). Goodwill Donation Center Agreement Motion by Councilmember Farrell, seconded by Councilmember Bodiovick to adopt the appropriate resolution approving the Recycling Agreement with Goodwill Industries for 1992. (Resolution No. 92 -46) Tree Program Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke to approve a shade tree short course for various members of the City Staff at a cost of $50.00 per person. (All in favor). Ayes - Councilmembers Bodiovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 2. Community Development Director - MTM Lease /Engine 328 Mr. Russell brought Council attention to the memo from Planner Pung - Terwedo regarding the Lease Agreement for Engine 328 which was signed in 1976. Also, a hearing will be held by the Planning Commission on Monday, March 9 regarding the annexation of land in the City's north end. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Bodiovick, seconded by Councilmember Funke to adjourn the meeting at 8:35 P.M. (All in favor). ATTEST: CITY CLERK 6 MAYOR • • • Stillwater City Council Minutes • March 4, 1992 Recessed Meeting • • Resolutions: No. 92 -35 - Directing Payment of Bills. No. 92 -38 - Gambling License Renewal at Brines by St.Croix Valley Hockey Ass'n. No. 92 -39 - Gambling License Renewal at Madcapper's by St.Croix Valley Hockey Ass'n. No. 92 -43 - Vacation of Alder St. No. 92 -44 - Appointment of Don Beberg as Acting Police Chief. No. 92 -45 - Appointment of Tim Bell as Acting Police Captain. No. 92 -46 - Approval of Goodwill Center Agreement for Recycling. 7 • • • TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Public Works Director DA: March 13, 1992 RE: PART -TIME EMPLOYEE M E M O R A N D U M I would like to hire one (1) part -time employee starting April 1, 1992 (weather permitting) starting salary at approximately $7 per hour. The proposed part - time employee has been with the City for the past two years. R. H. Stafford Auditor- Treasurer Pamela S. Mattila, CPA Finance Manager March 16, 1992 Clerk, City of Stillwater 216 N 4th St Stillwater MN 55082 RE: Application on property number 11175 -2200 An application for abatement of taxes - and /or penalties and /or interest has been requested on the above referenced property. The request has been approved by the Washington County Assessor and the Washington County Auditor - Treasurer. The result of this request would be a reduction in the amount due of over $10,000.00 • Before the county board may take action on this request, M.S. 375.192 requires that the school district and municipality be given a 20 day notice of the proposed reduction. Please refer to the enclosed copy of request and the proposed reduction. If you object to the granting of this reduction, please respond within 20 days of the date of this notice to this office. If you object, the request will be forwarded to the county board for their recommendation. If the county board approves the request, the request will then be sent to the commissioner of revenue for the final determination of the approval or denial of the request. If you do not object to the granting of this reduction or you do not respond to this notice within 20 days, the request will be forwarded to the county board for final approval or denial of the request. R.H. Stafford Auditor - Treasurer By Gary Poser Tax Div. Mgr. WASHINGTON COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER OFFICE OF AUDITOR - TREASURER 14900 61ST STREET NORTH • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082-0006 612/430 -6175 Mary Lou Larson Executive Assistant • Gary Poser Tax - Elections Manager T. R. Greeder Asst. Auditor - Treasurer Nancy McPherson License- Records- Manager Washington County does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age and handicapped status in employment or the provision of services. Applicant's Name (2 Aapplicant's Social Security Number 'elephone (work) ( ) 'elephone (home) ( ) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY I Property I.D. or Parcel Number:/ � �`� ,� o ���n -- �a �� �� V— 4: or Township .treet Address (if different than above) City S � G / , School District No. Legal Description of Property: ASSESSOR'S ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE: Class Land $ / * Q �'e ' O Structures $ /� 5 � o v Total $ APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: I believe an error in assessment occurred for the following reason(s): fL 1. Owner's Estimate of Market Value: Land $ Structures $ What do you base this value estimate on? Explain. 2. Date Property Acquired Type of instrument used to convey title: Cost of additions and improvements since purchase $ APPLICATION FOR REDUCTION IN VALUATION OF REAL ESTATE AND /OR REFUND OF TAXES PAID (M.S. 375.192) Please print or type. Applicant's Mailing Address : 5 0 /27, 7 ' 1 Z L . 0 / Purchase Price $ Total $ APPLICANT'S REQUEST Applicant affirms no proceedings of any kind for correction of the assessment against said property are now pending in any court. Applicant believes that this property is assessed higher than property in the same class and of the same value in this assessment district and therefore requests that staemen ds a true tax capacity be reduced and that the market value of said property for said year be reduced to and fixed at S This and full statement of all facts known to the applicant relative to this matter. a ! o, ,r(--7,..-0-4--+ / - -7 q -r, Appliytint's Signature Date Illt OTE: Minnesota Statutes 1988. Section 609.41, "Whoever, in making any statement, oral or written, which is required or authorized by law to be made as a of this basis of , reducing, or abating any tax or assessment, intentionally knows is false imposing makes may be sen enced, unless of erwise p ov�ded by law to impri o o nment for more than o year or o payment of a fie of not more than statement 53,000, or both." For Taxes.Levied in 19 q/ and Payable in 19 %z REPORT OF INVESTIGATION After examining the applicants claims, I have carefully investigated this application and find the facts to be as follows: v OripinaF3 5 4'/7I 3, s - Proposed g'o 5 Reduction ❑ Tax Is Paid Date ❑ Tax ls Not Paid a Approved ❑ Approved ❑ Denied Reduction Of Tax Reduction Of Penalty Reduction Of Interest Total Reduction /Refund Total Payable 43 /6 - 7-q yco g 6 0 4 6, q 7 (/$ b I ❑ Denied Signature of Investigator The following accurately reflects both existing and proposed amounts. lane >v /79$45 x'081 ')3') .-/) 7,7 / 6/o) 113S ,:q 6 /6/4 /A ° zo _?(7 /0 3$ • 19 Local Tax Rate : ty'''au:: { : `v''f>: i } \ \ ?:iA.. n•.,.: • / - ��• Date v a • FI : » >ty A ; sr�l3 ,,. ....:.... ..::; !! awd, tlia • x+#+sior or:n ... ..... :..............,.....:::....... • .. eo�rnty sudFt ..:. d lhe. bosrd • :.::.....:.::.:::...:.:::. •.;. � � :..}::;;.:::. .::.::, :,...,..::..,:..:::::.:: •.:... :... ,...:.. :.: , :.:... , :.:::::...:..:..:.:..:.. ASSESSOR'S RECOMMENDATION (County assessor or city assessor ir�n cities) 3 C4 D - W — Assessor's Signature ................... .. COUNTY AUDITOR'S RECOMMENDATION • • • • • • • • ..... Auditor's Signature ..... .......... . .. COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONER'S ACTION (To be completed by county auditor) ❑ Approved ❑ Denied 1 certify that at a meeting held , 19 the County board, took the above official action on this abatement. This action was duly adopted and entered upon the minutes of Its proceedings as a public record, showing the names r taxpayers, other concerned persons and the amounts involved. .., n ..............:....... n...,... .. } .: ):91:�r{ f.: Yr: •::nwrc.:.r :.:... ..::::w., ::w:::::::,� :•• �::: v}:{•}}:{{{{ i} ;•:{• } }}w:::::.:::�: } ▪ ?ii:<:il:: j: :ij;::) ::ii:. ' ..:. .::........n :• :• : ^:::.....:........ . }.... (Complete only for approved abatements) I further certify that the approval of this abatement has resulted in the following changes: $ $ • • ARTICLE VI Tax Increment Section 6.1. Tax Increment Guarantee. (a) In the event that the Tax Increment generated by the Redevelopment Property in the year 1988 is less than $34,875 and beginning in calendar year 1989 in the event that the tax increment to be generated by the Redevelopment Property in any year is less than $62,000.00, the City shall provide notice to the Redeveloper of such fact and the amount of the deficiency in tax increment. Thirty (30) days after receipt of such notice the Redeveloper shall be liable for and shall pay to the City the amount of such deficiency, provided, that the Redeveloper shall not be obligated to make such deficiency payments prior to the dates on which tax payments for the Redevelopment Property would be due in each year. (b) The obligation of the Redeveloper to make the payments provided for in this Section 6.1 shall be absolute and unconditional irrespective of any defense or any rights of setoff, recoupment or counter -claim it might otherwise have against the City or any other government body or other person. (0) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, the City shall not be entitled to receive and the Redeveloper shall not be required to make any payment under this Section 6.1 of this Agreement unless and to the extent that the City has received an opinion of nationally recognized bond • counsel to the effect that the receipt of such payment, or a portion thereof, will not render interest on the Bonds includible in gross income for federal tax purposes. Section 6.2. Tax Increment Certification. On or before the date of issuance of the Bonds, the City shall establish a tax increment district within the Development District and shall request that the county auditor of the County certify the Assessed Market Value of all taxable real property in the Development District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76. The City shall pledge and appropriate the tax increment generated by such real property to the payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds. Section 6.3. Real Property Taxes. (a) The Redeveloper shall pay when due all real property taxes payable with respect to the Redevelopment Property subsequent to execution of the Redevelopment Property Deed. (b) The Redeveloper agrees that prior to the Maturity Date: (1) it will not seek administrative review or judicial review of the applicability of any real estate tax statute determined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Redevelopment Property or Minimum Improvements or raise the inapplicability of any such real estate tax statute as a defense in any proceedings, including delinquent tax proceedings; (2) it will not seek administrative review or judicial review of the constitutionality of any real estate tax statute determined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Redevelopment Property or Minimum Improvements or raise the unconstitutionality of any such real estate tax statute as a defense in any • proceedings, including delinquent tax proceedings; (3) it will not cause a reduction in the real property taxes paid in respect of the Redevelopment Property below the amount sufficient to pay the principal and interest due on the Bonds through: (A) willful destruction of the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof; (B) willful refusal to reconstruct damaged or destroyed property pursuant to Section 5.1 of this Agreement; (C) a request to the city assessor of the City or the county assessor of the County to reduce the Assessed Market Value of all or any portion of the Redevelopment Property; (D) a petition to the board of equalization of the City or the board of equalization of the County to reduce the Assessed Market Value of all or any portion of the Redevelopment Property; (E) a petition to the board of equalization of the State or, the commissioner of revenue of the State to reduce the Assessed Market Value of all or any portion of the Redevelopment Property; (F) an action in a District Court of the State or the Tax Court of the State pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 278, or any similar State or federal law, seeking a reduction in the Assessed Market Value of the Redevelopment Property; (G) an application to the commissioner of revenue of the State requesting an abatement of real property taxes pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 270, or any similar State or federal law; and (H) any other proceedings, whether administrative, legal or equitable, with any administrative body within the City, the County, or the State or with any court of the State or the federal government. The Redeveloper shall not, prior to the Maturity Date, apply for a deferral of property tax on the Redevelopment Property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.86, or any similar law. (c) The Redeveloper further agrees that prior to the Maturity Date, it will not request the County Assessor to assess the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum Improvements on any basis other than as Class 3d residential real estate under Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.13, Subd. 19. Section 6.4. Assessment Agreement. Prior to execution of the Redevelop- ment Property Deed pursuant to Article III of this Agreement, the Redeveloper and the City shall execute the Assessment Agreement, substantially in the form of the Assessment Agreement contained in Schedule C of this Agreement. The Assessment Agreement shall provide that the Assessed Market Value of the Minimum Improvements upon completion of 36 units shall be equal to $918,885.00 and upon completion of theiremainder of the Minimum Improvements shall be equal to $1,635,350.00, until the Maturity Date. 911 • • • • TO: FR: DA: RE: Mayor and City Council Diane Deblon, Finance Director March 17, 1992 1991 rtlr'raui1unrs AND TRANSFERS In reviewing the 1991 revenues, expenditures, construction accounts and debt service funds, it is my recommendation that the City Council approve the following transfers for fiscal year 1991: From #450 (TIF #1) #450 (TIF #1) #450 (TIF #1) #563 (construction) 552 (MSA) #563 (construction) 100 (General Fund) $ 2,400.00 #563 (construction) 100 (General Fund) $ 3,100.00 #285 (Wash. County recycling) 710 (solid waste) $ 5,000.00 #100 (General Fund) 710 (solid waste) $ 3,500.00 #100 (General Fund) 230 (Library) #100 (General Fund) 240 (Parks) M E M O R A N D U M To Amount 508- (S.A. Debt) $240,252.90 508 (S.A. Debt) $195,000.00 508 (S.A. Debt) $ 46,995.20 $ 37,196.84 ( 10,000.00) $ 10,000.00 Description City Land Downtown Shortfall in S.A. City Land Amory Site L.I. 271 - MSA Funds L.I. 271 Admin Charges L.I. 273 Admin Charges Recycling costs To cover deficit fund balance and recycling costs Excess transfer To cover 1991 expenditures 1 • • RESOLUTION NO. 92- Whereas, an assessment was levied on P.I.D. #11155 -2650 by the City of Stillwater for L.I. 278 in the amount of $340; and Whereas, the assessment should have been certified to P.I.D. #9296 - 4000 and Whereas, the City of Stillwater wants to correct this assessment. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Stillwater that the assessment for L.I. 278 in the amount of $340 shall be deleted from P.I.D. #11155 -2650 for payable 1992 and reassessed to P.I.D. #9296 -4000. Adopted by Council this 17th day of March 1992. Attest: city clerk Mayor • • • M E M 0 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: MARY LOU JOHNSON, CITY CLERK DATE: MARCH 13, 1992 SUBJECT: VERIFICATION OF MEETING DATE FOR FIRST MEETING OF APRIL This memo is just to verify for Council that the date of the first meeting in April is Wednesday, April 8, 1992. This change is due to the Presidential Primary Election being held on Tuesday, April 7. • • • TO: Mayor and City Council FR: City Coordinator DA: March 11, 1992 RE: SALARIES FOR NEWLY APPOINTED POLICE CHTRF AND CAPTAIN I would recommend that the Council consider, at a minimum, the following salaries for Don Beberg and Tim Bell for 1992: Don Beberg (Chief) Tim Bell (Captain) M E M O R A N D U M $52,000 $49,000 The annual salaries they earned in 1991 (excluding any overtime pay for Tim, but including holiday pay) were: Don Beberg $49,224 Tim Bell Base Pay $40,260.00 Longevity $ 3,086.64 Holiday Pay $ 1,785.96 (The salary of Dave Mawhorter in 1991 was $53,040) $45,132.60 Based on average settlements for police in the metro area for 1992, Tim's earnings as a sergeant would probably be about $46,500 (excluding overtime but including holiday pay). Don's salary as a Captain, if he were to "keep pace" with Tim's salary in 1992 would probably be at least $50,500. Therefore, I believe the salaries first listed above would be appropriate for Don and Tim's promotions and new responsibilities. 02— Mar -92 STANTON GROUP V MONTHLY WAGE RATES FOR TOP PATROL OFFICER 1 Coon Rapids — Employees are paid a shift differential in addition to base rate. 2 New Brighton —Wage rate will be adjusted to Stanton Group V Average on July 1, 1991 3 South Lake Minnetonka PSD— Includes the cities of: Excelsior (2,530); Shorewood (5,8 4 NorthSt. Paul — Employees to receive Iump sum payment for 1990 only of 0.5% 5 Ramsey — Employees will receive and additional .5% increase on the wage as of Dec. 6 Mounds View — Employees to receive Iump sum payment for 1992 of 0.5 %. Community 1988 11989 1990 19: Anoka $2,731.00 $2,827.00 $2,952.00 $3,081.00 NS Apple Valley $2, 782.00 $2, 893.00 $3,009.00 $3,129.00 $3,255.00 Blaine $2,711.00 $2,765.00 $2,931.00 $3,064.00 $3,140.60 Bloomington $2,783.00 $2,894.00 $2,995.00 $3,115.00 NS Brooklyn Center $2, 767.00 $2, 872.00 $2,990.00 $3,113.00 $3,203.00 Brooklyn Park $2, 757.00 $2,853.00 $2,967.00 $3,085.00 NS Bumsville $2,790.00 $2,881.00 $2,975.00 $3,094.00 NS Champlin $2, 744.00 $2,826.00 $2,939.33 $3,057.00 NS Chaska $2,716.00 $2,813.00 $2,934.00 $3,056.00 NS Columbia Heights $2,753.00 $2, 849.00 $2,991.00 $3,111.00 $3,204.33 1 Coon Rapids $2,765.00 $2, 848.00 $2,933.00 $3,050.00 $3,172.00 Cottage Grove $2,761.00 $2,871.00 $2,986.00 $3,105.44 NS Crystal $2,784.00 $2,895.00 $3,011.00 $3,131.00 NS Eagan $2,718.00 $2,799.00 $2,959.00 $3,077.00 $3,201.47 Eden Prairie $2, 975.00 $3, 209.00 $3,305.00 $3,405.00 $3,459.73 Edna $2,791.33 $2, 902.98 $3,019.10 $3,139.76 $3,234.06 Fridley $2,757.00 $2,853.00 $2,967.00 $3,086.00 $3,163.00 Golden Valley $2,770.13 $2,860.16 $2,974.00 $3,093.00 $3,185.79 Hastings $2,682.62 $2,789.92 $2,901.52 $3,017.58 $3,109.00 Hopkins $2,754.00 $2,850.00 $2,964.00 $3,083.00 NS Inver Grove Hgts $2,760.00 $2,854.00 $2,954.00 $3,087.00 $3,225.00 Lakeville $2, 785.00 $2, 894.00 $3,015.00 $3,155.00 $3,277.73 Maple Grove $2,760.00 $2,869.25 $2,992.58 $3,112.28 $3,236.77 Maplewood $2,744.00 $2,853.00 $2,966.00 $3,078.00 $3,172.00 Minnetonka $2, 825.33 $2,938.00 $3,029.08 $3,145.00 NS 6 Mounds View $2,744.00 $2,854.00 $2,975.30 $3,105.32 $3,182.95 2 New Brighton $2,771.00 $2,882.00 $2,988.63 $3,105.00 NS New Hope $2,772.00 $2,876.00 $2,991.00 $3,111.00 $3,196.55 4 North St Paul $2, 757.00 $2, 853.00 $2,909.55 $3,020.11 $3,110.71 Oakdale $2, 744.82 $2,840.88 $2,957.00 $3,081.00 Plymouth $2, 771.00 $2,889.00 $3,033.00 $3,154.00 NS Prior Lake $2,730.00 $2,839.00 $2,973.85 $3,115.11 NS 5 Ramsey $2,741.83 $2,837.79 $2,937.12 $3,092.00 $3,185.86 Richfield $2,763.00 $2,873.52 $2,988.46 $3,108.00 NS Robbinsdaie $2,757.00 $2,854.00 $2,997.00 $3,108.00 $3,203.00 Roseville $2,757.74 $2,854.26 $2,968.00 $3,087.00 NS St Louis Park $2, 793.00 $2, 904.74 $3,020.94 $3,141.78 $3,243.89 Shakopee $2, 727.05 $2,819.39 $2,932.17 $2,990.81 NS 3 S Lk Minnetonka not Group V not Group V $2,920.00 $3,037.00 South St Paul $2, 822.09 $2, 920.86 $3,037.69 $3,174.39 $3,269.62 Stillwater $2,759.12 $2,870.00 $2,986.00 $3,105.00 NS West St Paul $2,764.00 $2,874.00 $2,991.00 $3,110.64 $3,203.96 White Bear Lake $2,763.00 $2,859.70 $2,959.80 $3,092.96 NS Woodbury $2,758.00 $2,854.00 $2,961.03 $3,079.00 NS AVERAGES $2, 764.23 $2, 867.80 $2,981.53 $3,102.00 $3,210.26 f • 1993 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS $3,367.71 NS NS NS $3,367.71 15); Greenwood (663); and Tonka Bay (1,487). 31, 1991, effective 7/1/92 and 10/1 /92. • • - V141 -3 LE 6:41AR-wto-Q SkSLIA) -a5� • • • • JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1992 FULL...__ TIME OFFI CER OVERTI ME: January 157 paid hours, cost $4,238.00 January 15.25 comp hours, equals 22.88 hours FULL TIM EOFFICER OVERTIME: February 156 paid hours, cost $4,309.00 February 10.0 comp hours, equals 15.0 hours PART TIME OFFICER WAGES: January 328 paid hours, cost $3,203.00 February 727 paid hours, cost $3,646.00 DEPARTMENT ..__PERSONNEL: _ 1 Captain 3 Patrol Sergeants (Bell, Dauffenbach, Klosowsky) 1 Adult Investigator (Leo Miller) 1 Juvenile Officer (Leslie Wardell) 1 Narcotics Officer (Dave Roettger) 8 Patrol Officers (Doug Swanson, Art Sievert, Davin Miller, Rick Anderson, Jeff Magier, Craig Peterson). We are currently without TIMPARKO5 due to not hearing from the arbitrator on the termination hearing and we are without DICK ULRICH who is still on light duty (cannot be on patrol) due to his on duty injury back in September 1991. 1 Full Time Secretary /Dispatcher 1 Part Time Clerk /Typist (13.5 hrs per week) 1 Community Service Officer 92 -05L • • • TO: Mayor and City Council FR: City Coordinator DA: March 13, 1992 RE: PERA SERVICE CREDIT PURCHASE FOR GORDY SEIM The City, for some unexplained reason, did not withhold either the employer contribution or the employees contribution toward PERA for the first five (5) months of Gordy Seim's employment. This means that Gordy would have to work an additional five (5) months in order to qualify for full retirement (i.e., Rule of 85 which provides for full retirement if age and service equals 85) unless he was to purchase this service credit. The cost to purchase the service credit as explained in the attached letter from PERA is: Employer contribution Employee contribution Total M E M O R A N D U M $5,069.36 $ 617.25 $5,686.61 Special legislation would be needed in order to purchase the service credit. This could be done by either the City or Gordy. I could proceed with procuring the special legislation (via Representative Harriet McPherson) if Council approves. The real question that needs to be answered is whether or not the City should pay for the employers share of the contribution that was not made and now amounts to $5,069.36. Although the City is not legally bound to pay for the purchase of service credits, it was the City's obligation to contribute at the time, so it would appear to be a fair thing to do now. On the other hand, I think Gordy should pay for the purchase of service credits for the employees share which amounts to $617.25. I can discuss this with you further at Tuesday's meeting. • • • March 11, 1992 Mr. Nile L. Kriesel, Coordinator City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: Mr. Gordon C. Seim Sincerely, PUBIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION Dorothy I /./ Linn cc Mr. Gordon C. Seim Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota Suite 200 — Skyway Level 7 514 St. Peter Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 / .,s, (OFFICE) (OFFICE) 612 - 2967460 (TOLL FREE) 1- 800 - 652 -9026 (FAX) 612 - 297 -2547 Member No. 802777 Dear Hr. Kriesel: As requested, we have calculated the actuarial cost if special legislation is enacted to allow Gordon Seim to purchase credit for five months of service in 1965 when no deductions were reported for him. The amount due if payment is made on June 30, 1992 is $5,069.36. The legislature, in approving service credit purchase bills in the past, has required the individuals who benefit to pay the full actuarial cost involved so that the pension funds are not adversely affected. The employer may, at its discretion, pay all or any portion of the payment amount that exceeds an amount equal to the employee contribution rates in effect during the period of service, plus interest at 6 percent compounded annually from the date the contributions were due through the date payment is received in our office. Mr. Seim would have to pay employee deductions of $130.74, plus interest at 6 percent compounded annually which amounts to $486.51 as of February 28, 1992, for a total of $617.25. If we can be of any further service, please let us hear from you. • STILLWATER STATE IP TOURNAMENT • Head Coach George Thole 523 West Marsh St., Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 STATE CHAMPIONS 1975 1982 1984 STATE RUNNER -UP 1977 1989 1975 1977 1978 1979 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 CONFERENCE CHAMPS 1935 1943 1953 1975 1977 1978 1979 1982 1983 1985 1986 PONIES March 16, 1992 Dear Coucilman Funke: It has come to my attention that three positions on the City Charter Committee are available. I would like to be considered as a candidate to fill one of these positions. Sincerely, George Thole GT /mbr FOOTBALL • • • To: Stillwater City Council From: Robert J. (Bob) Utecht Subject: City Charter Commission March 16, 1992 This correspondence is meant to express my interest ins erving the City of Stillwater as a possible member of the city's Charter Commission. That interest is contingent on any commission opening that might occur in the future. In expressing the above desire allow me to state that I am a native of Stillwater, born and raised in Oak Park, a graduate of Stillwater High School, 1937. I left Stillwater in mid -1942 for service in the United States Naval Seabees, returning home in October, 1946. I moved to Minneapolis, later Bloomington in 1947 and remained in the latter city until roughly four years ago when we returned to the hometown. At present I write four columns per week for the Stillwater Gazette, the same newspaper I started out on back in 1936. Now, at age 72 I have the desire.to return some knowledge, some ex- pertise, and some experience back to the city and community of my birth, growing up years and exit into adulthood. We reside at 2325 Cottage Drive, Stillwater and our phone number is 439 -0823. Feel free to call at any time. Thank you for your interest. Bob Utecht • • • March 17,1992 Gary Funke 1605 W. Pine St. Stillwater, Mn. 55082 Dear Councilmen Funke: It has come to my attention that there are three openings onrithe Planning Commission. I woul be interested in being considered for appointment to one of these positions. Sincerely; )i /1- cu-e- Ron Anderson 216 W. Orleans St. Stillwater, Mn. 55082 • • • ALBERT E. RANUM TELEPHONE KARL M. RANUM (612) 439 -4143 ERIC J. RANUM March 17, 1992 Stillwater City Council Attn: Gary J. Funke 1605 West Pine Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: City of Stillwater — Charter Commission Dear Councilperson Funke: It has come to my attention that there are or soon will be openings on the City Charter Commission for the City of Stillwater. Please accept his letter as an expression of my interest in serving on that august group and a request that you consider nominating me for appointment to the same. I sincerely believe that I hold the best interests of the City of Stillwater to heart and I would endeavor to serve those interests to the best of my abilities at all times. Thank you for your gracious consideration. Very truly yours, Karl M. Ranum KMR /tlr RANUM LAW OFFICES, P.A. 104 NORTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER. MINNESOTA 55082 • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. V/92 -7 Planning Commission Meeting: March 9, 1992 Project Location: 226 East Myrtle Street Comprehensive Plan District: Central Business District Zoning District: CBD Applicant's Name: James and Katherine Anderson Type of Application: Variance PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Variance to the Parking Ordinance to convert the second story of a structure from a residential use to an office use. DISCUSSION: The request is to convert the second story of a structure at 226 East Myrtle Street from a residential use to an office use. The structure, known as the Van Meier home, has been used as an office on the first floor and residence on the second floor for a long time. The project, as proposed, will consist of changing the use of the second floor ill from residential to office. The square footage of the space is 1,100 square feet requiring three parking spaces. The existing office use of the first floor has also a parking demand of three spaces. The total for the site is seven parking spaces. There are approximately twelve parking spaces on the adjacent lot, the old Post Office Shops, which are accessed by the driveway. This is a private lot and the spaces are used by employees of the Old Post Office and leased to various downtown employees. The site itself may accommodate some parking. Two cars could park to the rear of the property. Otherwise, there is no room to park additional cars as per the City parking standards. • RECOMMENDATION: Approval. FINDINGS: The proposed use is consistent with other uses in the downtown. The site cannot accommodate the parking demand for the use. ATTACHMENTS: - Application Form - Letters from the Andersons PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Approval. • CASE NUMBER Street Location of Proporty: 226 E. Myrtle St. Logo! Doscription of Property; SEE ATTACHED Owner: Name Typo of Requestr ___ Rezoning ___ Spocial Use Permit _.L Variance Date of Public Nearing: NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to b drawn.on back tached, showing the following: 1. North direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. 3. Dimensions of front and side set - backs. 4. Dimensions of proposed structure. 5. Street names. 6. Location of adjacent existing buildings. 7. Other information as may be requested. Comments: (Use other side), Case Number Fee Paid �1 Date Filed 11/9° PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Estate of Katharine Van Meier - Persona - I' Add Norwest Bank, N.A., Representatpi Applicant (if other than owner): Name James and Katherine Anderson, proposed owners Address 2Q1 Oak St., Marine 55047 Phone: 433 -3024 ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat ___ Approval of Final Plat ___ Other Description of Request: _use_Qf_the_sesaUd_f1QQK_isr offices with _Earkina'arrangements as -is, with no additional parking restrictions or conditions. Andersons are parties to a purchase agreement with the Van Meier Estate which is contingent upon City a • va for - £fie purchaser's specific .use. Seller has granted purchase permi� ;! %: = amply for variance. S :gnature of Applicant: �^�' '"' a92 t C . ; - ' 9 g Vi P° ''2‘ cP G Sl 5 1 V1 51 ' 02 (date) Approved ___ Denied ___ by tho Planning Commission on subject to the following conditions: r • Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on subject to the following conditions: LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that part of Block eighteen (18) of the Original Town (now City) of 5 t i 1 1w:itor, described ns follows: Commencing at ;i point in the north lir of Myrt I,, tit reet one hundred (100) feet west of the West 1 ine of ; thence westerly f1unw the north line of Myrtle Street to ;l hoin t one hundred fifty (150) feet easterly from the e ;asst line of Second Street; thence northerly parallel to the east line of Second Street one hundred (100) feet; thence easterly parallel to the north line of 'Myrtle Street to a point one hundred (100) feet west of the west line of Main Street.; thence southerly parallel to the west line of Main Street to the place. of beginning. • • • January 28, 1992 Mr. Steve Russell City of Stillwater 216 N. 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Steve, WEI MEDICAL ELECTRONICS CO. 123 NORTH SECOND STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 As I mentioned to you on the phone, my father, James J. Anderson, has made a purchase offer on the Van Meier property. The estate of Mrs. Van Meier has accepted the offer. One of the conditions of our offer is that we obtain approval from the City of Stillwater for our intended use. Jim asked me to send you this letter to explain exactly what we intend to do with the propoerty. It is our intention use the building for the offices of WR Medical Electronics, and perhaps another tenant. Our present offices are crowded and we are simply going to spread out our offices to give us more room. No gain in employee count is expected as a result of the move - thus no increased parking demand. Employees will continue to park in the areas designated by the city for business employees, as they have in the past. We also run a Van Pool which already reduces parking demand from what would normally be expected. I estimate that there is already enough space within the property to park about 6 cars, not counting the space available at present on the old post office property. No major repairs are expected, other than improved electrical service. No changes to the exterior are planned. All significant architectural features will remain intact. Maintenance activities such as painting & window puttying will take place so as to bring the property into good condition. On the interior, we expect only painting, wallpapering, and similar Maintenance activities to occur. Essentially, we are going to use the building as -is. Thus, I presume that we do not need to draw up elaborate descriptions of our rather simple Maintenance chores and present them to the historical committee. Phone 612/430 -1200 • 800/321 -6387 • Fax 612/439 -9733 Please advise us promptly if we have to take further steps, other than sending you this letter, to obtain city approval. Our closing date is set for March 16th, so we would appreciate a response as quickly as possible. Sincerely, 2 Patrick J. Anderson cc: James Anderson • • • February 13, 1992 City Council City of Stillwater City Hall 216 No. Fourth St. Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Variance Application Dear City Council Members: Jeanne M. Anderson & Associates, Ltd. Attorneys at Law This letter serves to request an expedited review of the Variance Application of my clients (and folks), James and Katherine Anderson to the City zoning ordinances governing parking with reference to the property located at 226 E. Myrtle Street in Stillwater. The applicants are parties to a Purchase Agreement with the Estate of Katherine Van Meier for the subject property, which agreement is contingent upon City approval for the intended use of the purchaser. The Agreement calls for a closing date of March 16, 1992. I understand that the Planning Commission will review the Application on March 4, 1992 and that the City could then consider the case on March 17th rather than April 7 or 8. At this point the parties to the Agreement will have to amend the Agreement to extend the closing date and would like to limit the amount of additional delay pending the Variance procedures. Yours truly, ne M. Anderson 123 North Second Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 (612) 430 -0395 L Central Bank March 10, 1992 Steve Russell, Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 N. Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Dear Steve: We believe the variance request on Case No. V -92 -7 made by James Anderson for 226 E. Myrtle should be granted. Sincerely, k A. Morrison President MAM /skf P. O. Box 225, 101 South Main Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 -0225, (612) 439 -3050, FAX (612) 439 -9378 1946 Washington Avenue, Stillwater, MN 55082, (612) 439 -7303, FAX (612) 439 -7306 5995 Oren Avenue North, Oak Park Heights, MN 55082, (612) 439 -9160, FAX (612) 439 -2610 • • • • • s • i 0- 0 IN '4 h e %.hN' t )L•eo . '"1 h ■ J. 1 h y o �vn (44 IN t) b b r No . V. O O O b 1 f ; ► t ` 4, O H Q •o r 0 0 t 4 i S p S ^ 0 0 0 0 0 . ,. Is. es •. •, 11% •b e e e� e b • (L 18 1 1 1 , 1 h 4 p 1 + 40 4 Op t o $o a � N m 0 to 0 4 el AI• r<9 •ri /J D �^ y 4 - /VD.vTH • y 1 46Lf 4.4/1 J' ,- •/I✓ ,,asw /PORT O 0 r 1\ r b 30 3 0 N. N 41 (V W CO N V 0 0 0 0 0 N J• H ! .f• r. AN 0 ti 'Jr 8 0 IN V 24l /2' V.C.P t a,nAi. NORTH YY _CAL. `J A • /•. l o IV b• p.1 ! b A -t" to 1 1 4 IN 4 0 N n 1 ., // ■ � . �!v ; on4.ry mho •.OF. m 7 ' n e / . i , 0 0 1•• 1 z � y nccEy.� CI 1. 4• I as 8 t 0 a / V b � � 0 � 0 r"' , 1 r •• n b 8 0 i 1M • ,0 I. 44 . 1• d. LID •, 1 p • % 441 w .� a o� o b / /'rl 1 0 nt 0 P i 0 II , .•�.• i, Iico SE1'n..in w • M N CV$.ti �L..O I ' \ 7 4E4,37 Je ./'• _ N ` h 0 N w r •0 t b b ' 'a : e h h •' O 4 N 0 +I• +c 174_ /1• Vr�r ,..r•N.. / N WATER STREET /> a 00H W �ADes0 ,1 4.' a49C /2 • VC, Jl/•O 0 / Je - •1b d• b N 0 b / • 14 / t, O •e •• y., n . IN nr z3 N I b i M 0 8 �1 I 1 la I I .1. re , 4//. JI ��11 177.// 41.4//1' v. VC.P J•I, Jy ff. aa(( � �l IA ib • . NCIN ARCHITECTS ■ PLANNERS SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC February 14, 1992 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater City Hall 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Council Members: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 612 490 -2000 Pursuant to your request, we have reviewed the proposed plat utilities and streets for Green Twig Way, addition to the City of Stillwater. The development is located northeasterly of Eagle Ridge Trail; northerly of the Minneapolis - St. Paul abandoned suburban railway and south of Eagle Ridge Lane, adjacent to the sanitary sewer easement for the Oak Glen area and adjacent to McKusick Lake. This property was originally the property of Ruben Granquist and is now under development by the Anchobaypro Company. We have enclosed a segment of the City base map indicating the location of this development. This is Drawing No. 1. This development consists of five (5) single - family plots on a cul -de -sac entering onto Eagle Ridge Trail. Sanitary Sewer It is proposed to construct an inside drop manhole on the existing sanitary manhole on the sanitary sewer, which is in the easement on the east side of Eagle Ridge Lane. Sanitary sewer then extends to the proposed cul -de -sac and then southerly 115 feet providing service for all five lots. The sanitary sewer is indicated on Drawing No. 2. The sanitary sewer will be 8 inch PVC with 4 inch PVC services. Watermain Watermain is also indicated on Drawing No. 2. A wet tap will be provided in the existing 12 inch watermain on Eagle Ridge Trail and a 6 inch watermain will be constructed to the end of the cul -de -sac, terminating with a hydrant. ST PAUL, MINNESOTA RE: STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GREEN TWIG WAY SEH FILE NO. 92274 CHIPPEWA FALLS, WISCONSIN February 14, 1992 Page 2 • Streets It is proposed to construct a 24 foot wide street face - to-face of concrete curb and gutter. This deviates from the standard 32 foot street; however, there should not be any parking on the street, since parking is provided in driveways at each house. There will be no through traffic in this area, only the five homes served by this cul -de -sac. The cul -de -sac will be 80 feet in diameter. The roadway will be surfaced with 4 inches of bituminous and 6 inches of aggregate base Class 5 according to the City standards. Storm Sewer It is proposed to construct a single catch basin in the northeasterly corner of the cul- de-sac and drain the storm water from the street along an easement between Lot No.'s 2 and 3, outleting near the wetlands area at the edge of McKusick Lake. A ditch will be constructed from the end of the 15 inch pipe to the wetlands, where a wooden weir will be constructed. This will slow the water velocity down, such that erosion will be reduced and it will allow the water to spread out in the existing wetlands area for natural treatment before entering McKusick Lake. This will have to be reviewed by the Watershed District. Grading • The developer has requested that lot grading as well as rough street grading be included as a part of the City utility and street project. We have included the cost of site grading in the estimates for this project. Site grading will be required in conjunction with storm sewer installation to prevent erosion of the slopes. Cost Estimates We have estimated the cost of constructing the streets, utilities, and the grading. These costs include 35 percent, which is the standard percentage used for City projects. This 35 percent includes engineering, administrative, and legal, with a 10 percent contingency. The estimated costs are as follows: o Streets $37,750.00 o Sanitary Sewer 14,850.00 o Watermain 17,040.00 o Storm Sewer 8,625.00 o Site Grading 26,935.00 Total: $105,200.00 • • February 14, 1992 Page 3 • • We find this project to be feasible and can best be constructed as proposed in this feasibility study We recommend that the City Council and the City staff review this feasibility study and conduct a public hearing. The proposed schedule would be to begin construction on this project as soon as practical in the spring of 1992, and complete the project by late summer 1992. Si ely, REM /wrc Enclosures I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Regis- tered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Mi a. A? Date: 2// 5 / Z- Re N Reviewed By: ( - Y _� Date: Z - 1 1 1 -- 1 Z Richard E. Moore, P.E. City Engineer 4?9tre 14691 YS w J w J C9 w = ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS t PLANNERS USiCK Ro PROJECT ,n� LOCATION 42.8 ACRES 4 21 5 i\ *STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GREEN TWIG WAY L AKE ■ f� AMUNOSONIO • • FILE NO. • 92274 DRG. NO 1 • CONSTRUCT INSI LEGEND kt v � • a • SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN ' �• 4 . �� i f to # t i 9r 41 4% ENGINEERS • APCNITEC TS 1 PLANNERS F PE t :./ _ STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GREEN TWIG WAY t .: l � k , > iti ~, 0.� .'": , ,EE 7 Esc. ; hit r<r /ar .r1 er OF E �« j!O ,IC. Uf'� Ent i DRG. NO 2 A f . FILE NO. 92274 ; 3. ENGINEERS 1 ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS A X fr , N I-- • R r' k c. • ••• co co / _ • ...-5 .4 _.-,-- ....0. — 44 -? 7 ,.._ v c.1.g.e. ,. :,p - ...., e.-- ez_ m.. 7; ..e- , e4c STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GREEN TWIG WAY LEGEND FILE NO. 92274 ORG. NO. 3 STORM SEWER • RESOLUTION NO. 92 -49 CITY OF STILLWATER WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DESCRIBING THE IMPACT OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 36 TRAFFIC ON THE CITY OF STILLWATER AND STATING ITS POSITION ON A NEW BRIDGE ACROSS THE ST. CROIX RIVER AND TRUNK HIGHWAY 36 IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation is responsible to plan for and rnake improvements to the State Highway System to provide for existing and projected highway traffic; and WHEREAS, both the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation based on existing traffic conditions and projected future travel demand identified the Highway 36 Interstate Bridge as a critical problem and constraint to movement in the region; and WHEREAS, two - thirds of the traffic on Highway 36 that goes through Downtown Stillwater over the existing lift bridge does not have a downtown destination; an d WHEREAS, over the past thirty years, Stiliwater's population has grown by sixty five percent while traffic through Downtown Stillwater on Trunk Highway 36 has increased by two hundred and fifty percent; and WHEREAS, Trunk Highway 36 and the Interstate Bridge is undersized, hazardous, dangerous, congested and economically detrimental to the City of Stillwater for the following reasons: 1. The existing sixty year old, two lane, lift bridge and approach roadway does not provide sufficient capacity to accommodate current traffic; and 2. The roadway is narrow, intersections congested and hazardous, while pedestrian movements conflict with car and truck traffic; and 3. Most recently a car, truck accident on Highway 36 claimed four lives and the intersection of Main Street, Highway 36, and Chestnut Street is identified, based on accidents, as the most hazardous intersection in the St. Croix Valley; and 4. Severe congestion is experienced five to six hours per day in Downtown Stillwater and along Highway 36 at Frontage Road intersections; and 5. Local residents and visitors to Stillwater avoid the downtown because of traffic conditions negatively impacting local business; and 6. Because of congestion and traffic delays, highway traffic is being diverted to neighborhood City streets causing hazardous conditions around elementary schools and in residential areas. (Ai 4 fAl (-(4) 6iULeet/C l)rt -*LA-L-Yt 1 • WHEREAS, clogged downtown streets result in stalled cars, wasted energy consumption, excessive noise and air pollution; and WHEREAS, traffic in the Highway 36 travel corridor is projected to more than double in the next twenty years from 12,500 to 28,200 ADTS on the existing bridge and from 14,000 to 35,350 ADT on Main Street; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council, the regional planning agency, has recognized the need for a new bridge in their Transportation Policy Plan, Major River Crossing Study, 1989, which rates the Highway 36 Stillwater Bridge third highest out of the twenty worst bridges needing repair in the metropolitan area (Blooming Ferry #1 rated bridge and Anoka - Champlin #2 rated bridge are funded and under construction); and WHEREAS, planning for a new Highway 36 Bridge has been studied by MnDOT for over twenty years, since the early 70's with public awareness of the general bridge location and community support for the project; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater's Comprehensive Plan and Specific Stillwater Downtown Plan, consistent with the Metropolitan Council's Regional Development and Investment Framework identifies the need for a new bridge across the St. Croix River in a southern corridor location; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Historical Society nominated the Downtown Stillwater commercial Historic District to the National Register of Historic Places on November 21, 1991; and WHEREAS, the Downtown Stillwater Commercial Historic District is threatened by the no -build option under criteria of effect for evaluation published in the Federal REgister (September 2, 1986, 36, CRF, Part 800). This adverse impact I� is noise, air pollution and congestion the increasingly high volumes of G y traffic through Downtown; and 2 WHEREAS, according to Dr. Norene Roberts, author of Historic Reconstruction of the Riverfront: Stillwater, Minnesota and Intensive National Register Survey of Downtown Stillwater, Minnesota, 1989, stated in the recommendations "the most pressing problem and largest threat to the historic buildings in Downtown Stillwater is the constant and steady through traffic on South Main ". A majority of the buildings along Main Street in the Historic Commercial District were built during the 1860's, 187 0's and 1880's. The large semi - tractor - trailers rumbling through the downtown area a danger to the older stone and brick buildings over one hundred years old, some of which are leaning against their neighbors; and WHEREAS, over the years the City of Stillwater has worked with MnDOT to increase through highway traffic to the detriment of the City of Stillwater and Downtown business by: 1. Removing over fifty prime Main Street parking spaces to accommodate more cars and truck turning between Olive Street and Myrtle Street and Chestnut Street from Union Alley to the bridge; and • 2. Prohibiting left turns to accommodate pass through traffic making it more difficult to get around downtown. • WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater and MnDOT has studied in detail other Transportation System Management (TSM) options, including one -way streets, widening of Main Street and construction of new north -south roadways along the river and concluded that the options are/ not practical because street widths are narrow, (thirty to sixty feet, including sidewalks). Existing historic buildings are located at front property lines and would require demolition for widenings and the existing limited street system can not easily accommodate a one -way street without major demolition and reconstruction; and WHEREAS, MnDOT has studied the need for an /alternative locations for a new river bridge for the past five years with more than adequate opportunities for local government, resource agencies, community groups and resident participation and input into the study process; and • WHEREAS, MnDOT has conducted a detailed Environmental Impact Study of Bridge Corridor Locations and concluded that the new south corridor "provided the best balance of safe, efficient transportation and both positive and negative social, economic and environmental impacts. "; and WHEREAS, the central bridge corridor location in Downtown Stillwater would degrade the natural and historic character and economic vitality of Downtown Stillwater the birthplace of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, a central corridor bridge would demolish the existing lift bridge, a nationally recognized resource on the National Register of Historic Places, and an asset to the historic, cultural and visual integrity of Downtown Stillwater; and WHEREAS, the central corridor bridge would have an adverse effect under criteria of effect for evaluation published in the Federal Register (September 2, 1986, 36, FR Part 800). A new bridge introduces a visual, audible or atmospheric elements that are out of character with the historic integrity of Downtown Stillwater and alters its setting; and WHEREAS, a central bridge location would destroy the visual quality of the river and Wisconsin bluffline, as viewed from the Downtown, result& -in high noise levels generated by 32,000 ADT, concentrate air pollution and degrade one mile of City river open space and park lands; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Stillwater has held several public hearings on the need for a new bridge and locations of a new bridge; and WHEREAS, the vast majority of local business owners, property owners, community groups, Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Association and residents support the need for a new river bridge in the south corridor; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Stillwater that and based on the forgoing preponderance of information; facts, findings and recommendations that: 1. The Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation and other Wisconsin and Federal decision makers should finally decide 3 • • • Attest: that a new south corridor bridge is necessary to address regional as well as local traffic needs; and 2. That the Environmental Impact Statement preparation process was complete and provided more than adequate opportunity for public and City participation; and 3. That the City of Stillwater has participated in the review of studies and plans for Trunk Highway 36 and corridor improvements and will continue to work with MnDOT, Washington County and Oak Park Heights in the final bridge and Highway 36 roadway and interchange design and development process; and 4. That the City of Stillwater officially recommends approval of the plans for a new southern corridor Interstate Bridge and reconstruction of Highway 36 from County Road 5 to Highway 95. Adopted by the Stillwater City Council on March 17, 1992. City Clerk 4 Mayor • . MAR 11 'D2 18:02 MST ST . PAUL • '/ /�c.4 , 3 / / Am'aZing what they can do with computers these ;dais .Not long ago, citizens could only have inmag- inedwhat the mile -long bride proposed for the St. Croix River valley south of Stillwater might look 1ike..But now, using a computer, the Minnesota 'Department of Transportation is providing photo W iial`rtj+ images of how three possible bridge des' s w'Quld look in the current natural setting. The Pictures are helpful; they make clear that in that location the best option is no bridge at all.. ' Aifd'•it's .not just because the planned. Your -lane .14lge extending east f3rom Hwy, 36 would despoil or , ;of the most splendid views the Twin Cities metropolitan area offers. There's also potential 'eeological 'damage and the invitation the bridge would offer to leap#'rog urban development on the yf c nsin side.` ' roar's why the bridge is opposed by virtually . every: interested environmental organization -•- frgni ^the National Park Service to the Minnesota ai drWisconsin Departments of Natural Resources t6:46 4h private groups as the Voyageurs Region • latf anal Park Association, the Valley Sierra Club and the St. Croix River Association. The Park Service is involved because of its responsibility for e4 • //116 /</e V 4( kbridge too far, and too unsce is l the St. Croix as a National and Scenic River., Proponents argue that the bridge is: needed,,to cure traffic problems in. the: - $s Tally' :oia sum- mer and fall weekends when downtown Stillwater and its old two-lane lift bridge to ,,■isconsin are . jammed with cars. They also point Out that the two alternate bridge.locations.so. far considered — one north of Stillwater, one near the present bridge might do even more aesthetic; and envirnaaierl- ; ' tal harm than the proposed align ent;to tie Guth. All the more ieaeoa k, never ;to explore'fbrther a "no- build" option, wluch'. would .deal with Stillwa- ter's traffic by means Other thar.. obtrusive fbur�. ••• lane bridge. As Park Service ofic:1ro lt< June in an as-yet unin;swered :'I v: .A4 # Carlson, perhaps by wort ;fo concerned can find a t n jbit't ' 00/,':•• y "� Stillwater may need, co pstio' ;thief :; But `there, must be a better way to prrovide'it than by building a massive, view - destroying bridge: wh> ultimate, e f f e c t might only' be : to: iriisrease' �c Obleitts.. ;, The Minnesota Department of. Tratra 'oirtation has a duty to work with �tlie National Park Service and others who can help find that better solution. P.1 .• RESOLUTION 92- 03 -15 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION PROVIDING THE POSITION OF THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS AS IT AFFECTS THE PROPOSAL OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 36 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW BRIDGE ACROSS THE ST. CROIX RIVER WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Oak Park Heights has had the opportunity to receive public comment from its citizens as it affects.plans by the Minnesota Department of Transportation effecting the reconstruction of Trunk Highway 36 and Corridor Improvements related thereto as well as the current plans of the Department of Transportation to construct a bridge across the St. Croix River utilizing "the southern corridor" proposal; and, WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Oak Park Heights has received the staff report of,its planner, Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc., as well as the staff reports from its City Auditor, Tautges, Redpath & Co., Ltd., and . reports from its Consulting Engineers, Bonestroo, Anderlik & Associates; and, Based upon the foregoing, the City Council determines that the following negative impacts will occur within the City of Oak Park Heights if the currently proposed Trunk Highway 36 corridor improvements and currently proposed St. Croix Riverway Bridge are constructed as currently proposed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation; 1. The south corridor bridge will require the removal of significant portions of the City of Oak Park Heights neighborhoods in the area of the bridge construction and also result in an adverse and long term impact to adjacent neighborhoods. 2. That the south corridor bridge will have an adverse impact on the elderly, moderate and low income families within the City of Oak Park Heights who predominately occupy the impacted neighborhoods that will be lost if the south corridor bridge is constructed. 3. That the south corridor bridge if constructed would result in a loss of affordable housing stock within the City of Oak Park Heights for which there is insufficient replacement housing stock now existing within the City of Oak Park Heights to replace same. 4. Removal of the major portion of the residences in the area of Cover Park will adversely impact the park and its value to the City. 5. That the south corridor bridge will seriously disrupt the City's established grid type street system and traffic distribution network. 6. That the southern corridor construction will result in a loss of each Road which provides an important connection between two significant areas of the City. .7. That the south corridor bridge will result in the disruption of the municipal utilities and expense to the City for the replacement and reconnection of same which has not been budgeted for nor is projected as an expense of the City at the present! time. 8. That the south corridor the City construction of Oak will a significant financial loss to of tax base and market value of homes and properties. 9. That the school enrollment s Ct result in a disc for Oak Park p Heights students. \ 10. That the south corridor bridge construction will result in disruption of emergency vehicle access and increase response time of emergency vehicles into the areas disrupted by that construction. 11. That the south corridor bridge construction project will ,create significant environmental impacts, most notably and bluff cuts on the � s c to s Oak side ParkaHeightsaresidentsuon the bridge visual imp a Minnesota side. 12. That the proposed reconstruction project for Trunk Highway 36 which includes the lowering . of the roadway and limiting of access will result in a removal of businesses within the City of Oak Park Heights with a corresponding loss of employment. • 13. That the proposed Trunk Highway 36 reconstruction pro will limit access within the Trunk Highway 36 corridor requiring the removal idential areas adjacent the to the corridors adverse affects to res 14. That the Trunk Highway 36 limited access corridor will result in ,a loss of visibility and direct access for existing and undeveloped commercial property with the City of Oak Park Heights, including, but not limited to, the St. Croix Mall and other business located along Trunk. Highway 36. 2 • • 15. 'That the limited access Trunk Highway 36 corridor would result in short term construction impacts affecting the degree to which people will shop in the area during construction and, probably impact a significant loss of business revenue during the period of time of construction for those business located on or around the Trunk Highway 36 corridor. The City Council for the City of Oak Park Heights further finds that as it affects the existing proposal for the central corridor option that the City advocates additional study on the alternative by MnDot for the central corridor for the following reasons: A. The central corridor option will result in less of an impact to the City of Oak Park Heights neighborhoods which currently under the southern corridor proposal bear the primary negative impact of all construction within the southern corridor proposal. Within the central corridor proposal, fewer people would be required to be displaced or adversely affected. H. The central corridor option would have less of an impact to elderly, moderate and low income individuals and families with children than does the southern corridor option. c. The central corridor bridge option would not have a negative impact on cover Park and the related public facilities as are impacted by the southern corridor bridge option. D. That the central corridor bridge option would result in less disruption to transportation utility systems within the City of Oak Park Heights and less cost and expense to the City of Oak Park Heights necessitated by the relocation and reconnection to municipal utilities. E. That the central corridor bridge option which have Less of a financial impact on the City of Oak Park Heights most notably on its tax base. F. That the central corridor bridge option results in fewer environmental concerns as voiced by the Department of the Interior hand e Sierra a bridge which corridor e too on preferring the southern corridor. G. The central bridge corridor will result in less of a visual impact to the City of Oak Park Heights residents and not result in a significant cut in the bluff lands on the Wisconsin side of the river. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS that based upon the foregoing studies and recommendations and findings of the City Council for the City of Oak Park Heights, the following recommendations are made: 1. The City of Oak Park Heights requests the Minnesota Department of Transportation to extend the time for its decision and agree to work with governmental jurisdiction and environmental groups and local communities in addressing concerns and reviewing alternatives to the bridge corridor and the Trunk Highway 36 improvements. That the City of Oak Park Heights is of the opinion that insufficient time has been dedicated by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to examining the reality of a central corridor option. The Council recognizes that even the central corridor option does have significant impacts on the City of Oak Park Heights, but as opposed to the southern corridor option, provides the best alternative overall from the standpoint of social, economic and environmental concerns addressing the City. 2. That the Council finds and concludes that the draft and environmental impact statement as provided by the Minnesota Department of Transportation was\ drafted with a definite slant toward to the selection of the southern corridor. The Council further finds that the central corridor option and the facts to support its selection were never fully analyzed as part of the draft environmental impact statement. 3. , That the City of oak Park Heights herewith goes on record as opposing the "southern corridor" construction proposals as an impact of reconstruction of Trunk Highway 36 and the construction of a new interstate bridge across the St. Croix River. 4. That the City of Oak Park Heights herewith formally disapproves of the plans that it has received from the Minnesota Department of Transportation illustrating the southern corridor construction project affecting the reconstruction of Trunk Highway 36 and the construction of an interstate bridge utilizing the proposed "southern corridor ". That the City's disapproval of these plans is made in conformance with Minn. Stat. §161.17, Subd. 2 and requests referral of the plans to the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Planning Commission pursuant to the aforementioned statute. Passed by the City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights this 9th day of March, 1992. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Barbara O'Neal, Mayor 4 • • • Members of the City Council CITY OF S T ILLWATER City Hall 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 he :`C_u \, �,:ei" of American Inns ... Dear Council Members, The Lowell Inn found it necessary to resurvey financial damage which might be attributed primarily to the downtown construction. The November storms added to the significant loss of sales experienced during the last r,aif of Our attempt to verify the effect of the construction as the cause of this reduction has been reinforced recently by January and February returning to normal levels. This seems to indicate the construction rather than the recession, is the prime contributor to this problem. Nevertheless, this substantial loss in revenue has resulted in a corresponding erosion of Lowell Inn net operating income and property value. I am sharing this unpleasant information with you. • as a basis for a "hardship" claim in order for the City Council and staff to reconsider my request last year to include in your tax increment financing budget a slight extension to the west 25 feet of Blocks 9 and 10 (see, "Map B") . This involves the additional excavation, underground spring water collection and the retaining wall required to add four additional parking spaces. You turned down; my request at that tine because the SEH cost estimate was quite high and the budget tight. I then proceeded with the work on a private basis. However, the actual cost came in considerably less than the SEH estimate. Your reconsideration is requested because the cost of this work adds four more parking spaces at an average cost of $2,500 each. I now plan to apply for "c::ity utility Assistance ", which will cover a portion of this cost. The balance of the cost involves construction and back filling of the two -tier wall preferred by the City engineers. Since the wall is apparently not eligible for the utility assistance, I now request that you reconsider and find a way to add the approximate $6,500 construction and backfill cost of the retaining wall to your TIF. budget. We can then afford to pay for landscaping which will add to the appearance of the entiro public and private parking areas. Arthur V. Palmer CITYFE2.LI1 -57 102 North Second Street • Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Tel: 612-439-1100 • Bus. Off: 612-439-1102 • Fax: 612-439-4686 March 8, 1992 THIRD STREET "MAF' SECOND STREET LLJ tJ 1 - 1 -1 NR IN STREET -9 i"er %lc 7 .1"6" / • 7 d 44 // df IL r' H u [ • i1twater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: MARCH 13, 1992 SUBJECT: ON -SITE SEPTIC SYSTEM PERMIT FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 2285 ORWELL COURT NORTH (CASE NO. SS /92 -1). DISCUSSION: The request is to construct a single family residence on a lot of just less than one acre in the Penthouse Acres area north of Highway 96. No City sewer service is available to the area. The applicant has percolation tests for this site, and drainfield location and layout that has been reviewed by the Building Official. Covenants were placed on the subdivision when the final plat was filed in 1987. The covenants required the Architectural Control Committee, made up of subdivision property owners, approve the building design. The proposal meets the covenant requirement and City zoning requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the on -site septic system. FINDINGS: There is no feasible way of providing City sewer service to the lot at this time. ATTACHMENT: Memo from Building Official. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 Steve: Thanks THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA TO: Steve Russell FROM: Allen Zepper DATE: March 13 1992 RE: Private Septic System at 2285 Orwell Court, I have reviewed the submitted infrormation for location, design and percolation rates and it appears to meet all of the requirements of both the City and WPC — 40. CITY HALL • 216 NNRTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 • 612 - 439 -6121 • • • ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE FORBIDDING THE POSSESSION OF TOBACCO BY CHILDREN The City Council of the City of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota, does ordain: 1. The Stillwater City Code is hereby amended by adding a new subdivision 52.01, Subd. 3 which shall hereafter read as follows: (A) "Tobacco" means cigarettes; cigars; cheroots; stogies; perique; granulated, plug cut, crimp cut, ready rubbed, and other smoking tobacco; snuff; snuff flour; cavendish; plug and twist tobacco; fine cut and other chewing tobaccos; shorts; refuse scraps, clippings, cuttings and sweepings of tobacco; and other kinds and forms of tobacco, prepared in such manner as to be suitable for chewing or smoking in a pipe or other tobacco - reiated devices. (B) "Tobacco related devices" means cigarette papers or pipes for smoking. (C) "Crime" Whoever possesses tobacco or tobacco related devices and is under the age of 18 years is guilty of a petty misdemeanor. (D) The prohibitions of this regulation shall be in addition to the regulations contained in Minn. Stat. §609.685 relating to the sale of tobacco to children. (E) Adult persons employed as teachers by Independent School District #834 and assigned on a full -time basis to schools within the City of Stillwater are hereby given authority to issue citations in lieu of arrest for violation of this ordinance that occur within 500 feet of any school property. The form of citation shall be only those approved for this purpose by the Police Chief of the City of Stillwater. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council this ATTEST: • Mary Lou Johnson, Clerk day of , 1992. Wally Abrahamson, Mayor • ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 29.05 ENTITLED "PROHIBITING DEPOSIT OF STORM WATER IN SEWER SYSTEM AND REQUIRING INTERCEPTORS IN SOME CASES" THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DOES ORDAIN: 1. The City Code of the City of Stillwater is hereby amended by changing Chapter 29.05 entitled, "Prohibiting Deposit of Storm Water in Sewer System" to hereafter read as follows: Subd. 1. DISCHARGE OF SURFACE WATER. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged any storm water, surface water, ground water, cooling water or industrial process waters into any sanitary sewer. No rain spout or other form of surface drainage and no foundation drainage shall be connected to any sanitary sewer. Subd. 2. INSPECTIONS. The Public Works Director and other authorized employees of the City, bearing proper credentials and identification, shall at reasonable times be permitted to enter upon all properties connected to the City sanitary sewer system or the City storm sewer system for the purpose of inspection, observation, measurement, sampling and testing. Subd. 3. INTERCEPTORS. Grease, oil and sand interceptors shall be provided when they are necessary for the proper handling of any liquid waste containing grease in excess amounts or any flammable waste, sand or other harmful ingredients. Interceptors shall be located so as to be easily accessible for cleaning and inspection. If necessary, in the opinion of the Public Works Director, a suitable control manhole in the building sewer shall be installed to facilitate observation and sampling of the waste. The manhole shall be constructed by the owner in accordance with plans approved by the City Engineer. The owner shall maintain the manhole so as to be safe and accessible at all times. Subd. 4. SEPARATE CONNECTION REQUIRED. When separate sewer mains and storm sewer mains have been constructed and are available to property, the owner of the property shall take all action to separate the sewers and connect them separately to the sanitary sewer and the storm sewer in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance within 90 days after the date of mailing or delivery of official notice to do so. The notice shall be given to the owner or occupant in writing by the Public Works Director on order of the City Council. Subd. 5. CONNECTION BY CITY. Whenever any owner or occupants fail to comply with the written notice, the Council shall, by resolution, direct that the sewers be separated and installed and connections made with the sanitary sewer system and the storm sewer system and the cost of the installation be paid in the first instance out of the general fund, and then assessed against the property benefitted. Subd. 6. ASSESSMENT. After the installation and connection have been completed pursuant to Council resolution, the Clerk shall serve a written notice of the assessment upon the owner or the owner's representative directing the owner to pay the assessment to the Treasurer within 10 days after service of the notice. If the assessment is not paid within 10 days, the Clerk shall certify the amounts to the County Auditor for collection in the same manner as other special assessments and taxes. The Council may, by resolution, spread the assessment over a three - year period. Enacted by the City Council this ATTEST: Mary Lou Johnson, Clerk day of , 1992. Wally Abrahamson, Mayor • • • • T H E B I R T H P L A C E O F M I N N E S O T A MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR / DATE: MARCH 12, 1992 ��" SUBJECT: MWCC I AND I STUDY For the past two years the MWCC has been preparing an I & I Study. At last weeks meeting the results and recommendations of the study were presented. For Stillwater, the Study classifies Stillwater a wet community, meaning that of the communities in the Metro area, Stillwater is one where groundwater is getting into sanitary sewer lines as a characteristic of sewer flow. (See Table 1.) The Study does not classify Stillwater as having a high potential for reducing peek flows, rainwater infiltration, as compared to other communities. The Study estimates that .5 million gallons of sewage flow per day can be reduced from the sewer plant with I & I repairs (Table 1). The Study goes on to list incentives and disincentives to deal with the I & I problem. Besides providing information and technical assistance, the Study could result in a revision to the Comprehensive Sewer Plan and reevaluation of the I & I reduction goals of that plan. RECOMMENDATION: This report is for your information only - no action required. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612 - 439 -6121 Community Chanhassen Circle Pines Crystal Deephaven Eden Prairie Edina Farmington Forest Lake Township Fridley Little Canada Long Lake Maple Plain Mendota Heights Mound Moundsview Newport Orono Osseo Rosemount St. Paul Sh Stillwater Wacoma Wayzata West St. Paul a Combined Sewer Area GLT291 /007.51 Assessment of Potentially Excessive 1/1 Soil/ Groundwater Condition Wet Dry Dry Wet Wet Wet Wet Wet Dry Wet Wet Wet Dry Wet Dry Dry Wet Dry Dry a Wet Wet Wet Wet Dry Wet Weather Peak Ratio (WWPR) 2.81 2.32 1.97 2.69 2.85 3.03 3.61 2.68 2.17 2.92 3.56 3.00 2.03 Potentially Excessive RDI/I X X X X X Dry Weather Peak Ratio (DWPR) 1.62 1.48 1.36 1.39 1.60 1.36 1.34 1.63 2.02 1.91 1.74 X 1.60 X 1.65 X 1.77 X 1.49 X 1.72 X 1.85 X 1.45 1 X X X X X X X X X 1.45 Potentially Excessive GWI X X X • • DRAFT • • • G 31478A0.01 OH Pot RDI Wet 3.9-92 Iml 4 • 1 r 0 Potential RDI /I Reduction Wet Communities 0 ❑ /, o o 2 4 99% CONFIDENCE LIMITS POTENTIAL REDUCTION IN j WET WEATHER PEAK RATIO J 6 AVERAGE ANNUAL FLOW (mgd) 8 10 COMMUNITIES WITH POTENTIAL RDI /I REDUCTION BEST-HT REGRESSION LINE GL031478A0.01 OH Patti' Red. 3- 9 -92Im1 WWTP Blue Lake Chaska Cottage Grove Empire Hastings Metro Rosemount Seneca i lwater SYSTEM TOTAL 622.1 Potential I/1 Reduction 2010 BSF, 20 YR I/I Potential Peak Day Peak Day Peak Day Total Flow 1/1 I/1 Reduction (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) 64.3 40.8 5.1 4.1 2.8 0 3.3 2.3 0 23.0 15.6 0.1 3.2 1.3 0 473.0 298.6 7.5 2.8 1.7 0 40.1 16.0 0 8.3 6.0 • 0.5 385.1 13.2 • • • • GL031478A0.01 OH Inc.Disin. 3 -9-92 Iml Incentive / Disincentive Options I. Voluntary • Financial Assistance • Technical Assistance • Public Information • I/1 Reduction Goals II. Financial • I/I Surcharges • I/I Penalty Charges • Increasing Block Rates • 1/1 Abatement Credits • Peak Sensitive Rates • Separate I/1 Charges • 1/1 Capacity Charge III. Regulatory • Moratoria on New Connections • Capacity Limitations GL0314 OH Study 3 -9-92 Iml Study Recommendations • Continue MWCC's Interceptor Inspection and Maintenance Program • Continue to Improve Reliability of Flow Metering System • Implement Public Information Program for I/1 Control • Implement Technical Assistance Program for I/1 Control • Implement I/1 Reduction Goals Program • Periodically Review Systemwide 1/1 Levels • Implement Financial Incentive Program if 1/1 Reduction Goals are not being met • • • • G1331 OH Reduct. 3 -9-92 Iml 1/1 Reduction Goals Program • Set Mutually Acceptable 1/1 Reduction Goals for Communities with Potentially Excessive 1/1 • Communities to Amend 1/1 Control Plans in Comprehensive Sewer Plans to Reflect Actions to Meet Goals • MWCC / Metropolitan Council to Monitor Community Progress • If Progress Toward Meeting Goals is not Satisfactory, Source Detection Program / Cost - Effectiveness Analysis may be Required before Approval of Plans for Sewer Extensions • • PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL Mayor & City Council City of Stillwater 216 N. 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mayor & Council: DAVID T. MAGNUSON ATTORNEY AT LAW SUITE #203 THE GRAND GARAGE 324 SOUTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 (612) 439 -9464 P.O. Box 438 March 6, 1992 ATTORNEY WORK- PRODUCT /ATTORNEY /CLIENT PRIVILEGE I enclose for your review the initial letter that I received from Mr. Bennett and also my immediate response from him that I felt warranted under the circumstances. • Also enclosed is my letter to him written after Tuesday night's meeting. I think this summarizes the Council's position. We should have a strong position in this matter since the cases cited in my letter to Mr. Bennett have been the rule in Minnesota since the turn of the century. That is, that the City cannot delegate or promise away an exercise of the police power that is reserved in the present City Council. Eminent domain is clearly an exercise of the police power and the promise to use it in the 1985 Resolution should not be enforceable. Next, Barry Stack's survey reveals that the present launch area is actually on the Mulberry Point property and not on the portion of the property formerly leased by the Yacht Club from the railroad and contained in the 1985 Resolution. The launch ramp is at least 50 feet to the east of the property and therefore, the 1985 Resolution does not affect the launch ramp. Further, any promises made in 1985 were made to Scherber in furtherance of his marina plans. At that time, there were no known plans for a bar at the site. Also, Scherber and anyone else for that matter, had an ample opportunity to buy this property from the railroad. They should not complain that the City purchased it on the open market after they slept on their opportunity. We must now complete our park plans because of the LAWCON money received from the State. It would be a violation of trust to misuse the property now. However, we are obligated to provide street access to the Popeye building and this could be done by dedicating a street when the plans are implemented. Right now, of course, there is only a travelled roadway on Mulberry Point, but nothing with the definiteness that the owner's of Popeye's or the Yacht Club requires to have a marketable piece of property. I would be glad to discuss this with any of you. DTM /sls Enclosure cc: Nile Kriesel, City Coordinator Yours very truly, David T. Magnuson • • • • RE: Popeye's Dear Mr. Bennett: DAVID T. IVIAGNIJSON ATTORNEY AT LAW SUITE # 203 THE GRAND GARAGE 324 SOUTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER. MINNESOTA 55082 (612) 439 -9464 P.O. Box 438 Mr. Robert Bennett Bennett, Ingvaldson, Mclnery & Simons 8500 Normandale Lake Blvd., Suite 1640 Minneapolis, MN 55436 March 6, 1992 I have reviewed your letter of March 3, 1992 with the City Council of Stillwater and I share with you their thoughts. First of all, the City wishes to assure you that Popeye's will have continued road access to the front of their building, and at least for the time being, no significant changes will take place in the parking that is allowed on the property described in the Resolution of the City Council dated the 24th of June, 1985 or on the remainder of the Mulberry Point property. Since the launching area is not located on the property you formerly leased from the railroad, I will assume you are making no claim to its continued operation. For your information, however, it will no doubt be maintained by the City for the foreseeable future and you and your guests will be allowed the same access to this launching site as are other members of the general public. You are correct in assuming that the Mulberry Point property will be eventually changed into a park, pursuant to the City of Stillwater's Downtown Capital Improvement and Rehabilitation Plan and the exact configuration of this park is shown on the public documents that have been developed since 1987 with the help of the general public and with the full involvement of owners of the Yacht Club or their representatives. These park plans show road access across the Mulberry Point property to Popeye's front door and some limited parking and, in order to give your clients some assurances, I will recommend to the City Council that this street access, when finally determined, be dedicated to the public as a street. • It is the City's position, however, that the Resolution of the 25th of June, 1985 is void since to promise the exercise of Eminent Domain is an exercise of the police power that cannot be surrendered nor divested nor abridged nor bargained away, state Ex Rel. City of St. Paul vs. Chicago, M. & St. P. RY. Co. et al., 160 NW Reporter, 772 (Minn. 1916), even though the City and Scherber might have intended at the time to bind the City to use the police power. The "parties" could not accomplish in this manner what they had absolutely no power to accomplish in any manner. State Ex Rel. City of St. Paul vs. Great Northern RY. Co. et al., 158 NW Reporter, 972 (Minn. 1916). The rule is best stated in City of St. Paul vs. Chicago, St. P., M. & 0. RY. Co. et al. , 166 NW2d, 335. The holding in this case quotes the rule stated in 6 Ruling Case Law 190, Section 189 as follows: "The State cannot barter away the right to use the police power and cannot by any contract divest itself of the power to provide for acknowledged objects of legislation falling within the domain of the police power. Accordingly the Legislature cannot surrender or limit such powers either by affirmative action or by inaction or abridge them by any grant, contract or written delegation whatsoever. The discretion of the Legislature cannot be parted with any more than the power itself. These principals apply to the police power delegated to municipal corporations; thus the general police power possessed by a city is a continuing power and is one of which the city cannot divest itself, by contract or otherwise." Even if you were to convince the courts to overrule a long- standing principal, there are a number of changed circumstances that would make the resolution unenforceable. 1) When Mullers operated the property, it was simply a marina with no bar was connected with it. The use of the property has changed drastically since 1985 and any promises made to Scherber does not apply. 2) Scherber or his successors, or indeed Popeye's themselves, could have purchased this land directly from the railroad sometime between 1985 and the summer of 1991. If this parcel were necessary to anyone's business, they had ample opportunity to protect themselves by purchasing it. 3) The City purchased this property from the railroad and also the adjacent Mulberry Point property with funds obtained in part from a LAWCON Grant given to the City by the State of Minnesota in furtherance of a specific park plan that included the acquisition and conversion of Mulberry -Point into a park. Any use of this property obtained with these trust funds that is inconsistent with the plans considered by the State in approving the grant would be unconscionable and perhaps illegal. • • • • • • I hope you can help your clients realize that they must adjust to a changing community and that we must all work together for the common good of one another. Hopefully, having some certainty with regard to their access and will relieve their anxiety. DTM /sls Yours very truly, David T. .agnuson • • • Dear Mr. Bennett: DTM /sls DAVID T. MAGNUSON ATTORNEY AT LAW SUITE #203 THE GRAND GARAGE 324 SOUTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER. MINNESOTA 55082 (612) 439 -9464 P.O. Box 438 Robert Bennett Bennett, Ingvaldson & Mclnerny 8500 Normandale Lake Blvd.. Suite 1640 Minneapolis, MN 55437 March 4, 1992 I have received your letter of March 3, 1992 and will share this letter with the City Council immediately. Before I obtain their reaction to it, however, I must give you mine. I have never told you several times, in fact, not even once, that the City is out to "get" your client. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have told you, however, when you insist that your clients can do anything they like with their bar, that they are bound by the lawful ordinances of the City of Stillwater that they City has the authority to enjoin nuisances existing on the site and that your client's liquor license could be revoked if they do not abide by the same law that binds everyone. Any implication that you were threatened by me or anyone on the City staff is absolutely unfounded. If you have chosen to interpret our desire for compliance with local laws with trying to drive your clients out of business, it is an indication that you are hyper- sensitive and obviously trying to build a record by making strawmen to blow down. Yours very truly, David T. Ma uson Stillwater 'ity Attorney • • • ROBERT BENNETT * ERIC W. INGVALDSON * * DANIEL C. McINERNY JEROME J. SIMONS, JR. MICHAEL P. COATY MAR ,5 1992 BENNETT, INGVALDSON, McINERNY & SIMONS, P.A. - David T. Magnuson, Esq. Stillwater City Attorney Suite 203 The Grand Garage 324 South Main Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Re: Popeye's Dear Mr. Magnuson: ATTORNEYS AT LAW 8500 NORMANDALE LAKE BOULEVARD SUITE 1640 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55437 TELEPHONE (612) 921 TELECOPIER (612) 921-8351 March 3, 1992 * CIVIL TRIAL SPECIALIST CERTIFIED BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION AND NATIONAL. BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCACY • * REAL PROPERTY SPECIALIST CERTIFIED BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ALSO ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN WYOMING, 2 WISCONSIN I have received your letter of February 19, 1992 enclosing the two Notices of Lease Termination and reviewed the City's position with my client. As you and the council are no doubt specifically aware, as you were advised of this fact by Mr. Ingvaldson at one of our prior meetings, this type of action is in direct contradiction to and disregard of the Resolution of the Stillwater City Council dated June 28, 1985, a copy of which I have enclosed for your further review. In addition, you and the City Council are specifically aware that Mr. Scherber and my client, among many others, reasonably relied on that 1985 Resolution in conducting their business and investment affairs. Therefore, my client respectfully requests that you stop efforts to terminate these leases or otherwise act in contravention of the City's prior Resolution. It is clear to us that this is another in a series of actions by the City of Stillwater to drive our client out of business in its present location so as to further the City's new plan to redevelop that portion of the riverfront as a park. This is, of course, inconsis- tent with the City's policy in effect on June 25, 1985. While we recognize the City's power to create a park, it cannot do so by taking private property rights known to and verified by the City without just compensation or even due process. As you have indicated to me several times, the City has the means to and can "get" my client, but not without providing basic due process rights and just compensation for the injury to my client's property rights. March 3, 1992 Page 2 Please advise me if the City of this course of action by close is not done, our client will temporary restraining order in RB:sb cc: Robert Marois Greg Lindow VIA TELECOPIER AND REGULAR MAIL Stillwater will cease and desist from of business March 13, 1992. If this seek a declaratory judgment and a this matter. Very truly yours, Robert Bennett • • • • • • LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 92 -47 Ace Hardware A T & T A T & T American Engineering Testing American Linen Supply Co. American National Bank J. I. Case Company Cemstone Company Cleveland Cotton Products Cool Air Mechanical Copy Duplicating Products Courier, The D. C. Hey Company Fred's Tire Company Friot -Lay Company Fritz Company GAB Business Services, Inc. Gopher State One -Call Hogberg, Jack I. C. M. A. Jae's Precast Johnson, Ronald Junker Recycling Service Junker Sanitation Service Lawson Products Inc. Linner Electric Company Magnuson, David McGladrey /Pullen Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Metz Baking Company Midwest Specialties Sales Miller Excavating Minnesota Cellular One Mn. Conway Fire & Safety Minnesota Dept. Revenue Mn. Sex Crime Investigators Mn. Correctional Facility Mn. Correctional Facility Mn. Fire Agencies Purchasing Consortium Motorola, Inc. Northern States Power Company Northern Hydraulics North Central Technical College Otis Spunkmeyer, Inc. Pizza Hut Polfus Implement, Inc. Power Brake & Equipment Powers, Nancy D. Supplies Leased Equipment Lease /Rental Drilling /Clean Up Towel. Service Paying Agent Fees Parts for Loader Cement Hand Towels Repair Oil Line Developer Publications Service /Labor -Fax Tire Tube- Zamboni Concession Supplies Concession Supplies Insurance Claims Locate Requests Painting- Downtown Balance on Book Storm Sewer Boots - Johnson Recycling- February Garage /Lift Stations Asst. nuts /bolts 1 Ballast Legal Services Post Audit Sewer Service Charges Concession Supplies Spring Dozing Snow /Crused Rock Mobile Phone Fire Equipment Sales Tax - February Membership- Wardell Repair Parts - Fishing Pier Envelopes 1992 Dues Repairs Energy Charges Couplers Fire /Rescue School (4) Concession Supplies Concession Supplies Mower /Sweeper Tail Lamp Replacement Arbitration $ 249.77 54.37 152.68 5,367.50 40.00 2,131.59 121.98 127.63 139.38 842.09 140.00 6.00 90.00 7.58 185.78 451.80 2,750.00 10.00 150.00 3.50 757.60 39.99 8,167.50 426.00 453.47 30.00 5,276.00 1,200.00 76,799.00 139.36 8.30 2,106.06 68.89 205.77 11,085.78 15.00 48.03 19.30 35.00 576.00 220.38 19.98 180.00 74.00 72.00 14,700.00 79.10 1,150.00 Radio Shack River City Beverage Russell, Stephen Safety Kleen St. Croix Animal Shelter St. Croix Car Wash St. Croix Drug Sam's Club Schwaab, Inc. Short Elliott Hendrickson Stafford, R. H. Washington County Treasurer Stafford, R. H. Washington County Treasurer Stillwater Area C of C Stillwater Book & Stationery Stillwater Ford - Mercury Thompson Hardware U. S. West Communications Valley Auto Supply Van Office Products Van -O -Lite Company Watson, Dennis Wear Guard Jim Weber, Inc. Wybrite, Inc. Yocum Oil Company MANUAL CHECKS - FEBRUARY Blue Cross /Blue Shield Brine's Brine's Cat Ballou's Coka Company Junker Sanitation Service Lily Lake Imprest Fund Lily Lake Imprest Fund Police Patrol Postmaster Radisson Hotel South Stafford, R. H. Washington County Treasurer State of Minnesota Stillwater, City of P . O. S. T. ADDENDUM TO BILLS Anchor Paper Company Braun Intertec Becker Arena Products Catco Parts Service Central St. Croix Valley Joint Cable Communications Cassettes Tapes Concession Supplies Expenses Parts Wisher Services February Charges Squads Washed Bill Collections 1992 Membership -Fire S tamp Engineering Waste Management Fee Redistricting Map Meals Office Supplies Carburetor Work Supplies Telephone Service Auto Parts Paper Towels Bulbs -Lift Stations Programming Uniforms Bobcat Works - #257 Mte. Agreement Fuel Oil February Billing NSF Check NSF Check NSF Check City Pins February Payment Reimburse Reimburse Book /Tape Postage for Meter Reservation- Bodlovick Recording Fees Books - Criminal Code Reimburse Petty Cash Police Exams (3) Copy Paper Construction Testing Goal Frame /Nets Equipment Parts Charter Comm. Meeting 22.37 451.00 98.46 94.00 282.50 74.50 11.95 25.00 23.35 8,698.52 434.77 65.00 158.00 355.34 66.00 89.92 1,504.33 335.76 104.00 64.94 165.00 320.61 90.00 195.00 585.92 3,568.92 80.00 23.31 35.00 315.00 71,570.50 223.73 228.32 65.00 1,000.00 75.00 16.00 111.70 124.77 37.50 76.76 16,809.50 1,256.00 189.94 53.26 • • • • Commissioner of Transportation Commissioner of Transportation Courier, The Images of Past & Present Johnson Bros. Corporation Johnson, Mary Lou Kaiser, Kenneth Lakeland Ford Company Midwest Siren Service Motorola, Inc. Municilite Company Oswald, Diane Runk, John St. Croix Cleaners Schwaab, Inc. Sentry Systems, Inc. Short Elliott Hendrickson Springsted, Inc. Tri -State Pump & Control Uniforms Unlimited Washington County Fire Chiefs Assn. Adopted by the Council this 17th day of March, 1992. APPROVED FOR PAYMENT State -Aid Project Re -Lamp Publications Film /Processing Payment No. 8 Expenses - Elections Tree Grant Consultant Turn Signal Switch Siren Repair Install Convertor Repair Strobe Llght Refund -Del. Sewer - Garbage Refund Forfeit Property Laundry Stamp Monitoring Service Engineering Services -Oak Glen Repair - Nelson St. Lift Uniforms 1,516.25 186.43 74.83 29.63 252,814.34 9.21 100.00 51.40 52.00 578.65 81.50 558.62 459.34 15.60 22.35 108.00 1,137.99 5,709.45 2,261.93 281.43 1992 Dues 10.00 • • • CLAIM AGAINST CITY.OF STILLWATER NAME OF CLAIMANT 0,-11 - a ' rnad' w(nzk. 430 - g ; a - i ADDRESS 4 3 1 eb L C \ (u i St-(O I (c0 PHONE N0. l "StgO( WHEN DID EVENT OCCUR? ( Fib if -u_a, k p�1 , tct9 k c)(3 \ \of -\-o`( %otAfk of tcic 4)4 WHERE DID EVENT OCCUR? WHAT HAPPENED? rr I eW (A t'AY {VS - (A9Q, t - • e.(Ax av2*6Le eAvci.k Cca(���, , COLA Cutetd 1 ea)._ N9 O ` Q)2.09,u_sx `k2 U ct.Q�-x-c,e ( `ov k c ec.Q LKsz _ 1 co Iyr cm a rQ_bc-r of A- w.s WHY DO YOU `HEEL THAT THE CITY WAS Al F ?� Cite �Vl 3t Y� 10-e ¶ is kieAvLQ em- a 4-0 p<Se a e- STATE THE NATURE OF THE DAMAGE AND THE COSTS ASSOCIATED I t (,) 42ta C c»as c, ,�• c ( ` 1 OfS1 ` Q , p (P C 2 (2 CO NAME OF PERSON MAKING REPAIR; OR GIVING CARE 0 RA16 r "-Q t� d- ` 1>44' cuo-J / aed // 799 SIGNATURE CA) ( 96I aped ' 1. You have to formally notify the City in writing within thirty (30) days of the occurrence of an event whereby you feel you have suffered damages. LG214 (7■29/91) n Renewal Organization base license number e: App Ica New O ganization oit matioTrt Name of Organization C L Z ti Business Address of Organization - Street or P. 0 Box (Do not use the- address of your Son t■)0 . t"( 66-erl 5712. 5T. eAt..L- PAt) 5S /0/ City State Zip Code �T. P s u L r ■ S5 / 0/ of chief executive officer (cannot be your gambling manager) Tide LuCTLt Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premises Permit Application - Part 1 of 2 Premises permit number to to Gannbli' . Pre ?a .ses> nfor na o. . Name of establishment where gambling will be conducted C19-7 84_110 T 11 5 �4rfa 0.4SAiruc 1 to Nf � me et't AA-4 rS q►--' !7a 1 ivy �h 1.�•�alc� rSLy�l T /lt�/� � e �Z and address of legal owner of premises City State tC. Class of premises permit (check one) ❑ A ($400) Pull -tabs, tipboards, paddlewheels, raffles, bingo d B ($250) Pull -tabs, tipboards, paddlewheels, raffles ❑ C ($200) Bingo only ❑ D ($150) Raffles only gambling manager) County SXeuZN O i re.c ro Bingo Occasions • If applying for a class A or C permit, fill in days and beginning & ending hours of bingo occasions: g No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by your anization per week. Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning /Ending Hours t to to If bingo will not be conducted, check here ©.- Street Address (do not use a post office box number wo- m �4; r) Is the premises located within city limits ?s O No If no, is township organized unorganized I= unincorporated City and County where gambling premises is located OR Township and County where gambling premises is located if outside of city limits Zip Code cc_ Does your organize on own the building where the gambling will be conducted? p YES ®' NO If no, attach the following: • a copy of the lease (form LG202) with terms for at least one year. • a copy of a sketch of the floor plan with dimensions, showing what portion is being leased. A lease and sketch are not required for Class D applications. • Il��' Do o use nm e ui Adcl res s '` � of s toragespace. g g q p r Address City State 500 Svc), Po be i -T sc 2. 57 &14L bi i' Zip code SS /o FOR BOARD USE ONLY BASE # PP # FEE CHECK INITIALS DATE to Daytime phone number /D-) .2 -) --9‘‘b Daytime phone number 40- )c.t3-)—Co !no an `Account' 3` forr atto Bank Name Bank Address Name Ackno ledgemen Gambling Site Authorization I hereby consent that local law enforcement officers, the board or agents cf the board, or the commissioner of revenue or public safety, or agents of the commissioners, may enter the premises to enforce the law. Bank Records Information The board is authorized to inspect the bank records of the gambling account whenever necessary to fulfill requirements of current gambling rules and law. Oath declare that: •I have read this application and all information submitted to the board is true, acourat nd complete; -all othe fequife'd information h=en fully disclosed; S of chief ex sC�'o verr rr ent Acknowted : efiz. 1. The city *must sign this application if the gambling prem- ises is located within city limits. 2. The county * *AND township ** must sign this application if the gambling premises is located within'atownship. 3. The local unit government (city or county) must pass a resolution specifically approving or denying this application. City* or County ** City or County Name Signature of person receiving application The U I Datb Received eullirdiaLb} 3 / I 6 / Refer the int ctions for required attachments. Mail to: Minnesota LaufuI Gambling Premise Permit Application - Part 2 of 2 City Bank Account Number State Lp Code ;IVa address a{td: tls of pars out . 00*.ed;to si .0..;# ck0.KOake d e sits aril witfidiawals '. .......................... ..........•: >:<: >:.Oroanrrauons treasrrrsr: noChartdle' aambfirr�" fui�ids ': ?:`: >;: >a�:: > >�s<:<= «`<<:: may v Adoress I itle Gambling Control Board Rosewood Plaza South, 3rd F oor 1711 W. County Road B Roseville, MN 55113 • I am the chief executive officer of the organization; • I assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful opera- ='_ tion of all activities to be conducted; • I will familiarize myself with the laws of Minnesota governing lawful gambling and rules of the board and agree, if licensed, to abide by those laws and rules, including amendments to them; • any changes in application information will be submitted to the board and local unit of government within 10 days of the change; and • I understand that failure to provide required information or providing false or misleading information may result in the denial or revocation of the license. 4. A coov of the local unit of aovernment's resolution ao- provina this aoolication must be attached to this aoolication. 5. If this application is denied by the local unit of government, it should not be submitted to the Gambling Control Board. Township: By signature below, the township acknowledges that the organization is applying for a premises permit within township limits. Township ** Township Name Signature of person receiving application Title Date Received LG214(Part 2) (Rev712491) • LG202 (7/10/91) Premises In I orma f Name and Address of Lessor from (hours) from (hours) from (hours) from (hours) from (hours) from (hours) from (hours) Ciao i x CA- re,c.P.irS .2-AjC. Name of Legal Owner of Gambling Premises P. cAt Pi - f^ Syw ) 7 o Name and Address of Leased Premises C,4/ 64--//act 'S //a iv , mom. Name of Organization Leasing the Premises (lessee) ........:........... ............................... ........... ............................... ........................ . Gambling Acti The lawful gambling activity which the organization will conduct is (check all that apply): O bingo I 1 raffles paddlewheels L� pull -tabs 1 1 tipboards Minnesota Lawful Gambling Lease Agreement 1 1 Rent Inforination (See Rules 7860.0090, Subp 3) Class A and C premises permits: Rent for bingo and all other gambling activities conducted during that bingo occasion may not exceed: $200 for up to 6,000 square feet; $300 for up to 12,000 square feet; and $400 for more than 12,000 square feet. • 1 Rent to be paid oer binoo occasion $ 1 1 Rent to be oaid oer month $ 4 / 00 • Rent may not be based on a percentage of receipts, profits from lawful gambling, or on the number of participants attending a bingo occasion. An organization may not pay rent to itself or to any of its affiliates for space used for the conduct of lawful gambling. The area(s) leased within the premises are 4/ feet by feet by feet by Sketch .. .. Attach a sketch which shows the location and dimensions of the leased areas. Effective Dates::; > :; <.:: :. The lease will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. on 19 % 3--, for a period of at least one year. Times and Days Of Bingo ACtcUZtg : (If none, indicate .WA) ; °; ::'n : WA The bingo occasions will be held (a maximum of 7 bingo occasions per organization): (a.m. /p.m.) to (a.m. /p.m.) to (a.m. /p.m.) to (a.m. /p.m.) to (a.m. /p.m.) to (a.m. /p.m.) to (a.m. /p.m.) to City/Zip Code Phone 5 /) S 9 S/S� //c). No- MA ;Iv S/i/lra,.Te, n, Address City/Zip Code Phone SO 8 1. Nishretigate _Nod, 5 r` /tvi .r ,t, 6 / 2--) 4/34-1777 Address City/Lip Code .5 / /w4 rex S5o E License Number, if known , ' 1 / 1 .. Address (a.m./p.m.) on (days of week) (a.m. /p.m.) on (days of week) (a.m. /p.m.) on (days of week) (a.m. /p.m.) on (days of week) (a.m. /p.m.) on (days of week) (a.m. /p.m.) on (days of week) (a.m. /p.m.) on (days of week) Class B and D premises permits: Rent for gambling activities not including bingo is a maximum of $1000 per month. feet, for a total of feet, for a total of feet, for a total of I Combined total 19 Y , and will end at 12:00 a.m. on 3 / 3 / square feet. square feet. square feet. square feet I By agreeing to the terms of this lease, it is mutually agreed that: • When leasing from a licensed bingo hall, the lessor must be legal owner of the property. • The owner of the property or the lessor may not manage gambling at the premises. • The lessor of the premises, his or her immediate family, and any agents or employees of the lessee may not participate as players in the conduct of lawful gambling on the leased premises. • The lessor and the lessee do not have a direct or indirect financial interest in the distribution or manufacture of gambling equipment. • The lessor of the premises will allow the Board or agents of the Board, the Commissioner of Public Safety or agents of the commissioner, or the Commissioner of Revenue or agents of the commissioner, and law enforcement personnel to inspect the premises at any reasonable time, and permit the organization to conduct lawful gambling at the premises according to the terms of this lease. The lessor may not impose any conditions on the organization regarding distributors of gambling equipment, services, or the use of profits. • The organization must obtain an organization license, gambling manager license and a premises permit from the Gambling Control Board. The organization will be responsible for complying with the laws and rules of lawful gambling. • The organization must have, at the gambling premises, a current inventory of gambling equipment, a sketch with dimensions of the premises available for review, and a clear physical separation or divider between the lessee's gambling equipment and the lessor's business equipment. • The organization will be responsible for ensuring that the lessor's business activities are not conducted on the leased premises. • The lease shall be terminated immediately for any gambling, liquor, prostitution or tax evasion violations occurring on the premises. • The lessor of the premises shall provide the lessee access to the licensed premises during any time reasonable and necessary to conduct lawful gambling on the premises and as agreed upon in this lease. • (Write in any other conditions or restrictions that will be included as part of the lease. Attach additional sheets if necessary) This lease is the total and only agreement between the lessor and the organization conducting lawful gambling activities. There is no other agreement and no other consideration required between the parties as to the lawful gambling and other matters related to this lease. Any changes in this lease must be submitted to the Gambling Control Board within 10 days of the change. Title A coov of this lease and sketch with dimensions must be submitted with the premises permit application renewal or when changes in the lease occur to: Gambling Control Board Rosewood Plaza South, 3rd Floor 1711 W. County Road B Roseville, Minnesota 55113 (7/10/91) • • • RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL OF A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PERMIT FOR PULLTABS CLIMB, INC. WHEREAS, Climb, Inc. has submitted an application to the City of Stillwater, requesting City approval of a pending Minnesota Lawful Gambling application permit, and WHEREAS, representatives of the organization appeared before the City Council and demonstrated to the City Council that the organization is collecting gambling monies for lawful purposes. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Stillwater approves of the gambling license requested by the organization at Cat Ballou's, 112 No. Main Street in the City of Stillwater, Minnesota. The Mayor and City Clerk are directed to sign the acknowledgment on the permit application, and are to attach a copy of this Resolution to the application to be submitted to the Department of Gaming. Enacted by the Stillwater City Council this 17th day of March, 1992. ATTEST: CITY CLERK MAYOR i 4.-r • trim 11; Minnesota Transportation Museum Inc. • ` � JOHN W. DIERS, Chairman • 2500 W. 54th Street • Minneapolis, MN 55410 • • March 3, 1992 Mayor Wally Abrahamson, City of Stillwater, 216 North 4th St. Stillwater, Minnesota, 55082 Dear Mayor Abrahamson: The Minnesota Transportation Museum was recently notified of the City of Stillwater's intention to annex a portion of its railroad right of way within Stillwater Township. It is our understanding that this annexation fulfills a long term plan which was approved by the Metropolitan Council in 1981. The Museum supports the proposed annexation, and agrees that the proposed action is in the long term interest of the property owners, including the Museum. It, also, recognizes that the annexation may be controversial and that part of the controversy is suggested by the position the Museum has taken with respect to a Washington County Ordinance regulating its railroad operations. That is unfortunate. Annexation should be seen as a question of overall benfit to the community. It should not be viewed as a special interest of those who either support or oppose the operation of the trains. For that reason, the Museum will not have an official representative at the public hearing on Monday The issue is annexation, not the Minnesota Transportation Museum. The Washington County Ordinance is a separate issue. It is an issue because it deprives the community of an important part of its history and heritage, but it is also the law, and the Minnesota Transportation Museum respects the law. For that reason, our Board determined that it will not operate a regular schedule of trains during the summer of 1992, and that any special operation for Stillwater's Lumberjack Days will be confined to the city limits of Stillwater. I have asked that this letter be read at the public hearing and be made a part of the record Sincerely, i 'U d John . Diers • • r �z Oa • WIN ' r.sr re l n ne sota Transportation Museu � Mi Museum Inc. • ` JOHN W. DIERS, Chairman • 2500 W. 54th Street • Minneapolis, MN 55410 `• „„1I • • March 2, 1992 Mr. Steve Russell, City of Stillwater, 216 North 4th St. Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Dear Mr. Russell: 1, Several months ago a letter was circulated to Museum members with a mailing of the Minnegazette. The letter, which appeared under my name, was meant to inform members of the current status of our efforts with respect to the Museum's dispute with Washington County and the, then, proposed ordinance. The letter suggested that Museum officials and City staff were collaborating "covertly" on various strategies to circumvent the ordinance, particularly as it might relate to annexation of the Museum's property. I was reminded of this issue in a letter from the Stillwater City Attorney which was only recently brought to my attention. I must apologize to you and other City officials. The statements in the letter were embarrassing to me, personally, and did not represent my position or my understanding of the discussions which occurred. I did not write the letter. It was drafted by one of our members at my direction. Its statements reflected the perceptions of this member and were not my views. Unfortunately, I was not available to review it prior to publication. That error is mine, and I accept responsibility for it. We are a volunteer organization. Being so, it is sometimes difficult to assure that all statements made by members accurately reflect Museum policy or the position of the Board. In this case they did not. I deeply regret this matter and ask that you share this apology with appropriate staff. Sincerely John W. Diers • • • !'L S -Iry i j j V/`y2 lee Co: ncl/ 47.) ��//U c� I+CG 0 , i►lc'ry. • l �J J y. O Cc 4" 1 0 iii S V 13 I Go ✓1 n 1 •'1 q C p ��✓! ✓rte i ' Y-L Ct a y1 ,--/--- y r cc, 1- G�. i.z fU I1n n / 4.Z 6 cf ., -( La ie "Liz) c e / 2- rJa,�G1 q i192, 6,6 /1 +6, / /G n� 1 'C.S • f L M ✓✓+ , Yt e 1 7/ ) .J es y , c A 1.4_.) c, S a, v1 CyC re 6.4 b j O V ^ 4. 7/ V I S G / O + * "it) ct17 Y�,,C 1^vv-- cv` it 5 1L4'r% 414, c :.G/�j,' 7 /e_S.w`PiDCe 01.i.!L[ 1 / C rte G S rr � 1 L•4-• � �lnc 7 e,cC ?(, /; / rs r�1 /h u n Gtr r u / 3 i / /(v 1 c n5),,,7 • 7A e c(L c'L pr f .(✓ , i2 (..) A, C Lt, h.C ` a1 U /4 "! I, f -c k,•7t $� / / /1,�ktf Tcuhs /^ �'(�/r' �e 41�. eLh.0( E b000^ U `J ,�GrCGUGt � S , G(rr, / � /t� C.1.Z kU ✓1 Q Y1 li iC , ^ Y`^•1 V1� C : ly .S..c' � s �/� G"t S�'I f, �2t ^�7 'C�i`M p C4 p U (56 /1 /ccoLS I& z✓o�nJ 0 1 0. -T S 4IS. Aotr �,� �ou moo, / - t C I .J eia / 1 , . . 4 . tl. I "; , 1 /w(.G,• Gi nUl Ci ."V G lo cle_ 1 /1Z $. ) ,&I 57 9 �- ( • / r yy ,E -7L6 toy( S 1,�. h�l�S -/ `' r `43 '1 , „J • • • 14791 N. 60TH ST., SUITE 2, STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 -6359 612/439 -3838 • OFFICERS MICHAEL A. MORRISON President LYNN SHAFER VP- Campaign JENNY SCHLAGENHAFT VP- Publicity JOHN T. HALL VP-Allocations KEITH OLSON Treasurer JENNIFER WHITING Secretary STEVE ZINNEL Past President BOARD MEMBERS PAM BROMEN CATHERINE BUCK SUSAN DUNN • WENDY L. EHLENZ SALLY EVERT TRACEY A. GALOWITZ JAMES GILLESPIE JEFF HANSON BARBARA HELD RODELL L. HOFLAND CHIP HOOLEY DICK JEANS ROGER KARRICK PAUL KIOLBASA MIKE MAHONEY ERVIN NEFF HARRY D. PETERSON ROBERT E. PETERSON DEBBIE PIERRE KATHY RECK DIANE THOMPSON Life Member JC PFEIFFER Executive Director LAURIE MAHER Community Services ST. CROIX AREA UNITED WAY March 6, 1992 Honorable Mayor Wally Abrahamson and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mayor Abrahamson and Council Members: It is rumored that you are considering instituting a nonrefundable fee of $400 to $500 for organizations to use Lowell Park for special events. Last year the St. Croix Area United Way held a campaign kick -off fair in the Park on September 7 from 10 A.M. to 2 P.M. Nineteen local not - for - profit organizations participated. About 500 to 1000 people attended. Set -up began about 8; A.M. and we were out of the Park by 4 P.M. We would like to hold the same event this year on September 12, and on future years on the first Saturday following Labor Day. However, we are very concerned about a large fee for use of the Park; therefore, we ask that in your deliberations,you consider one of the following two alternatives: JP:lm 1. No fee be charged to nonprofit, 501 (c)(3) organizations using the Park for periods of one day or less. 2. The City specifically excuse this particular event from payment as the City's contribution back to local United Way member agencies. If you need further information, I would be happy to attend any meeting you request me to. Sincerely, C JC Pfeiffer Executive Director cc: Nile Kriesel Tim Thompson Jenny Schlagenhaft It brings out the best in all of us.'"" association of metropolitan municipalities I. GOVERNORS BUDGET HAMMERS CITIES! CUTS TO CITIES OUTRAGEOUS! • Legislative Contact Alert March 9, 1992 TO: Mayors, Legislative Contacts and Managers /Administrators FROM: Roger Peterson, Director of Legislative Affairs Vern Peterson, Executive Director RE: GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL AND STATUS OF MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREA PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE BILLS The Governor's overall budget proposal uses accounting gimmicks for savings of $178 million for schools, reduces `rainy day fund' by $140 million, cuts state agencies and higher education by $164 million, and cities LGA by $71.6 million. City aid cut of $71.6 million is 23% of LGA, equalization aid, and city disparity reduction aid. For cities receiving these aids, this equals an 8% -plus cut of Revenue base (i.e. aids plus levy). Schools, Counties, Towns, Special Districts, get ZERO cuts. They are held harmless! Not all cities are cut. Those receiving only HACA have no cut. Is this divide and conquer? Enclosed is a preliminary run showing the impact on AMM cities. The AMM position at this point is that cuts to cities are unnecessary. Additional use of the rainy day fund may cause small short term state borrowing but that would have no impact on the state's bond rating and would certainly be preferable to the major impact the cuts would have on the general public health and safety if cities are forced to make large cuts. Cities should contact their legislators and relate how this may -1- 183 university avenue east, st paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227 -4008 \1\0 • impact locally. The AMM absolutely does not want to get into a battle among cities but pointing out that schools, counties, and towns are held harmless is appropriate. POINTS TO STRESS: 1. Cities have already done their part. Local government, through aid cuts and support of sales tax increase, solved 41% of the state's $1.2 billion problem in 1991 while accounting for only 10% of the state budget. Likewise, we solved over 35% of the problem in 1990. For the past 3 years, cities have taken cuts, held levies down, spent tax dollars wisely, reduced employees, and this is our reward. 2. The administration says this is a 1.1% cut of base. This is very misleading. The cut is 1.1% of all County, City, Town, and Special District Revenue but only cities are cut. The cut becomes 3.5% of all city revenue but 7% of operating budgets when non - cuttable special assessment revenue is eliminated. Finally, the cut becomes about 8% after non -LGA cities are removed. When one gets beyond smoke and mirrors, this is a 23% cut of all city LGA and an 8% cut of city revenue base. 3. Cities need to communicate the impact of these cuts to their legislators. Remind them of the cutbacks already taken. Register indignation. Think about use of city newsletters and local media to get the unfairness story out. It is about time the state stops solving its problems on the back of cities. Minnesota cities spend at about the national average, but when all Minnesota state and local governments are added together, spending is much greater than the national average. We aren't the problem and shouldn't be the solution. NOTE 1: THE ATTACHED RUN IS BASED ON ALL $71.6 MILLION AID CUT COMING FROM CITIES AID NOT INCLUDING HACA. THE Azymnum BASE USED WAS 1991 WHICH SHOULD BE SIMILAR TO 1992. ' nu ACTUAL CUTS MAY VARY BY A FEW DOLLARS. NOTE 2: THE AMM HAS JUST LEARNED THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS DELAYED RELEASING THE ACTUAL PLAN AND BILL, THUS THEY MAY BE WORKING ON CHANGES TO THEIR PROPOSAL? II. STATUS OF KEY METRO BILLS' A. HF 1778 (REP. ORFIELD) -SF 1656 (SEN. MONDALE) WASTEWATER TREATMENT FINANCING: The AMM opposes this bill as noted in the AMM Legislative Contact Alert, dated February 27th. The bill was heard in the House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee on Thursday, March 5th. and was held over. It -2- was scheduled for a continuation hearing for Tuesday, March 10th. and to meet the Legislative deadline, it must pass out of this committee by March 14th. No hearing has been scheduled in the Senate as yet but if HF 1778 passes out of Committee by the deadline, SF 1656 will be heard in a Senate Committee sometime the week of March 16 -21. AGAIN, Tat: MAIN REASONS FOR AMM OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL: 1. Does not provide solution to the problems that do need to be addressed in the older developed portion of the Metropolitan Area. 2. Weakens the regional approach to waste water treatment and financing of the metro sewer system on an equitable basis. 3. Raises legal questions because of the vast amount of money already collected through SAC fees for system expansion, current and future. 4. It is premature at this point in time, since Minnesota Laws 1991, Chapter 183 also authored by Rep. Orfield directs the Metropolitan Council to study the concerns and problems of the older developed communities and report back and make recommendations to the Legislature in January 1994. ACTION SUGGESTED: Please continue to discuss your concerns with this bill with your Legislators particularly your Representatives. If HF 1778 passes out of the House Committee by the weekend deadline, please sign up to testify on SF 1656 when it is heard. We will do our best to let you know if a hearing gets scheduled in the Senate. B. PROPOSED EXPANSION OF MET COUNCIL AUTHORITY OVER LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING. (no bill number as yet) As noted in the Legislative Contact Alert dated February 27th. a proposed bill has been developed by a subcommittee of the House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee which makes some changes to the Met Council's authority vis a vis comprehensive planning and the other Metro Agencies (RTB, MWCC, etc.) The bill moved out of the subcommittee and will likely be heard in full committee on Wednesday, March 11th. or Thursday, March 12th. Attached is the section of the bill which expands the Council's authority with respect to being able to require modifications to local comprehensive plans. -3- • • • • • To our knowledge, this bill has not been introduced as yet in the Senate but if it passes the House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee this week it will likely get a `hearing' in the Senate Metropolitan Affairs Committee sometime the week of March 16 to 21. ACTION SUGGESTED: If you share our concerns with the proposed expansion of the Council's authority, please discuss it with your local legislators as soon as possible. C. HF 1977 (Rep. Trimble) - SF 1958 (Sen. Price) LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLANS. Both HF 1977 and SF 1958 have been heard in the respective Environment Committees and have been passed by the committees. Both bills are consistent with AMM legislative Policy IV -I. Water supply plans would not become a 1 5th. System' nor would the Net Council have approval authority over the local plans. Cities would, however, be required, to prepare local water supply plans by 1995 and these plans would be subject to Met Council "review and comment ". The bills are consistent with AMM policy as previously noted but there are some parts which are of concern. Parts which trouble us are: 1. Existing municipal water appropriation permits would all be reviewed by January 1, 1998, by DNR. The permits would be subject to modification if the DNR Commissioner determines that the local contingency plan is not feasible. 2. Local Water Supply Plans for cities that use ground water for all or part of their water supply would have to be submitted to the county in which the cities are located for review and comment if that county has adopted a ground water plan under M.S. 103B -255. 3. Increased reporting and administrative records keeping required by cities in terms of the amount of water used by the city. ACTION SUGGESTED: You may want to review the provisions of these companion bills and discuss with your local legislators if they are of concern to you. -4- Column 4: Column 5: aid that estimated Column 6: 1992 LGA, Column 7: aid after ESTIMATED IMPACT OF GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL The attached printout lists the estimated impact of Governor Carlson's budget proposal upon selected Minnesota cities. The 1992 revenue base (certified levy + LGA) for all cities is not currently available; thus, in the printout the 1991 revenue base is used. (For most cities the 1992 revenue base should not be dramatically different from the 1991 revenue base.) The following is a description of each of the columns in the printout. Column 1: Payable 1991 revenue base. Column 2: The estimated reduction in state aids that would result from the Governor's proposal. Column 3: The estimated reduction as a percentage of the payable 1991 revenue base. For most cities this should be about 8.2 percent unless the sum of the 1992 LGA, equalization, and disparity reduction aid for the city is less than 8.2% of its 1991 revenue base. The new revenue base after subtracting the aid cut. The sum of LGA, equalization aid, and disparity reduction was certified for 1992. (Disparity reduction aid is .) The estimated aid reduction as a equalization aid, and disparity Amount of LGA, equalization aid, the cut. percentage of the total reduction aid. and disparity reduction • • • • • • *l4444 ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL PRELIMINARY -- SEE ATTACHED MEMO FOR DETAILS ANOKA APPLE VALLEY ARDEN HILLS BAYPORT BLAINE BLOOMINGTON BROOKLYN CENTER BROOKLYN PARK BURNSVILLE CHAMPLIN CHANHASSEN CHASKA CIRCLE PINES COLUMBIA HEIGHTS COON RAPIDS COTTAGE GROVE CRYSTAL DAYTON .DEEPHAVEN EAGAN EDEN PRAIRIE EDINA FALCON HEIGHTS FRTDI EY GOLDEN VALLEY HASTINGS HOPKINS INVER GROVE HEIGHTS MAHTOMF.DI MAPLE GROVE MAPLEWOOD MENDOTA HEIGHTS MINNEAPOLIS MINNETONKA MOUND MOUNDS VIEW NEW BRIGHTON NEW HOPE NORTH ST PAUL OAKDALE ORONO OSSEO PLYMOUTH PRIOR LAKE RAMSEY RICHFIELD ROBBINSDALE ROSEMOUNT ROSEVILLE SAINT ANTHONY SAINT FRANCIS SAINT LOUIS PARK SAINT PAUL SAINT PAUL PARIS SAVAGE SHAKOPFE SHOREVIEW SHOREWOiOD SOUTH ST PAIN SPRING LAKE PARK SPRING PARK STILLWATER WAY7ATA WFST ST PAU1. WO0i'!Fupr WOODLAND Revenue Est. Percent Rev. Base Base Cut Cut After Cut 3787642 309072 8.2% 3478570 8268095 346439 4.27 7921656 1508952 0 0.01 1508952 847897 21567 2.51 826350 5963657 486634 8.21 5477023 22529287 0 0.0X 22529287 7298651 595570 8.2% 6703081 11232077 916537 8.21 10315540 11941835 317566 2.71 11624269 2981583 243297 8.21 2738286 3012098 0 0.01 3012098 1464520 119505 8.21 1345015 895180 73047 8.27 822133 5029738 410427 8.21 4619311 9131801 745155 8.27 8386646 5323839 434425 8.21 4889414 5405523 441091 8.21 4964432 711578 32878 4.61 678700 916060 0 0.01 916060 9807752 0 0.01 9807752 12677803 0 0.0% 12677803 10369526 0 0.0% 10369526 780728 63707 8.21 717021 6242486 509387 8.21 5733099 7021431 18589 0.31 7002842 4580512 373770 8.21 4206742 5294749 432052 8.27 4862697 4740254 386805 8.21 4353449 1168027 95311 8.2% 1072716 7648602 122916 1.61 7525686 7616701 621523 8.21 6995178 2282077 0 0.01 2282077 179067845 14611936 8.21 164455909 12695379 0 0.01 12695379 1905059 155453 8.2% 1749606 1983229 161831 8.21 1821398 3549373 289629 8.21 3259744 4856392 396282 8.27 4460110 1741034 142068 8.2% 1598966 3393597 276918 8.27 3116679 1711328 0 0.01 1711328 477257 38944 8.21 438313 9611837 0 0.07 9611837 263660 27043 1.0% 2609647 1695340 138340 8.27 1557000 9500685 775256 8.21 8725429 3806306 310595 8.21 3495711 2798289 228340 8.2% 2569949 6641658 0 0.0% 6641658 1705430 127316 7.51 1578114 488976 25136 5.11 463840 12695604 1035961 8.2X 11659643 119961855 9788887 8.21 110172968 1072846 87544 8.21 985302 2115614 50231 2.41 2065383 2605060 142925 5.5: 2462135 4119334 0 0.01 4119334 1790051 0 0.01 1790051 6162900 502893 8.2: 5660007 106936,7 87260 8.21 982107 480990 0 0.01 480990 4186453 341615 8.21 3844838 1538357 0 0.01 1538357 4806451 39220h 8.21 4414245 4725791 0 0.01 4725791 135697 0 0.07 135b97 Aid (LGA Percent Aid After DRA, EA) Cut Cut 1044511 29.61 73543 346439 100.01 0 0.07 21567 100.01 1084851 44.9% 59821 0.07 164716 36.21 105159 144288 63.51 52635 31756 100.01 43165 56.41 18835 0.01 28068 42.6% 16117 24058 30.41 16753 192354 21.51 151311 219127 34.01 144611 90646 47.92 47203 168777 26.12 124668 3287 100.0X 0.0: 0.01 0.02 0.0X 17112 37.2% 10742 147896 34.41 969573 18589 100.04 1154055 32.4% 780285 762287 56.71 330235 407471 94.91 20666 130200 73.21 34889 122916 100.0% 0 655883 94.81 34360 0 0.0X 0 59926160 24.4X 45314224 0 0.0% 0 276184 56.31 120731 561182 28.87 399351 652558 44.41 362929 926657 42.81 530375 657516 21.61 515448 570198 48.61 293280 0 0.0; 52511 74.22 13567 0 0.0% 0 27043 100.0% 0 275897 50.1: 137557 3015710 25.77 2240454 1444054 21.5: 1133459 , 370551 61.61 142211 • 0 0.01 0 12731E 100.0% 0 25136 100.0: 0 1805307 57.4% 76934E 38890877 25.21 29101990 418669 20.91 331125 50231 100.0: 0 142925 100.0: 0 0 0.0: 0 0 0.01 0 2279237 22.11 1776344 2049b4 42.6: 117704 0 0.0% 0 711517 48.01 369902 0 0.02 0 1038748 37.82' 646542 0 0.0: 0 0 0.01 0 35 02/28/92 16:12 MET COUNCIL AUTHORITY EXPANSION 1 improvement programs with other adopted chapters of the 2 metropolitan development guide. The council may require a local 3 governmental unit to modify any comprehensive plan or part 4 thereof which may have a substantial impact on or contain a 5 substantial departure from metropolitan system plans. By 6 (date), the council shall establish criteria, after 7 soliciting comments and suggestions from potentially affected 8 local government units, for determining when a comprehensive 9 local plan or plan amendment will have a substantial impact on 10 or substantially depart from metropolitan system plans. The 11 criteria may not be limited to a metropolitan facility's 12 capacity, but must also address whether a proposed plan or plan 13 amendment will have a substantial impact on or substantially 14 depart from metropolitan system plans, as that phrase is used in 15 section 473.852, subdivision 8. 16 Sec. 3. Minnesota Statutes 1990, section 473.865, 17 subdivision 1, is amended to read: 18 Subdivision 1. Each local governmental unit shall adopt 19 official controls as described in its adopted comprehensive plan 20 and shall submit copies of the official controls to the council 21 within 30 days following adoption thereof, for information 22 purposes only. The official controls adopted shall implement 23 the purpose, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive 24 plan. Zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations must not 25 allow land use and development that will effectively prevent the 26 planned land use as designated within specific areas of the 27 comprehensive plan. The determination of the timing of the 28 implementation of the comprehensive plan shall be at the sole 29 discretion of the governing body'. 30 Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 1990, section 473.858, 31 subdivision 1, is amended to read: 32 Subdivision 1. Within three years following the receipt of 33 the metropolitan system statement, every local governmental unit 40 34 shall have prepared a comprehensive plan in accordance with sections 462.355, subdivision 4, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871 36 and the applicable planning statute and shall have submitted the 9 (RESDEPT ] RE DD353 • • League of Minnesota Cities 183 University Avenue East St. Paul, MN 55101 March 11, 1992 Contact: John Tomlinson (612) 227 -5600 TO: Mayors, Managers, and Clerks FROM: Donald A. Slater, Executive Director SUBJECT: Governor's Proposal for Drastic Cuts in City LGA Governor Carlson has proposed city LGA cuts of $71.6 million for this city budget year, calendar year 1992. The cuts are limited to city aid other than HACA and are 8.0% of city revenue base (levy plus aid). There are NO cuts to the aids of counties, townships, and special districts. Attached are these materials: * City Views giving the facts on the proposal and arguments against it. * A listing of the aid cuts for all cities. Considering that the proposed cuts apply to THIS BUDGET YEAR, the aid cuts already made for this year in the 1990 and 1991 sessions, and the frozen levy limits for this year, this is one of the most damaging proposals ever made regarding city aid. It is urgent that you take these steps THIS WEEK expressing your outrage regarding this proposal: 1. Call or write to the Governor. 2. Call or write to both your State Senator and State Representative. 3. Discuss the proposal with news media personnel in your area. 4. Inform your city employees about this proposal. The League of Minnesota Cities has issued a press release expressing our opposition to the Governor's proposal. The League will conduct a followup press conference on this subject featuring a representative panel of leading city officials on Thursday, March 12 at 1:30 pm. Don't assume that someone else will communicate with your legislators or the Governor on this subject. Every city official must personally write and /or call if we are to be effective. Remember, we cannot expect any help from the counties, townships, or schools, since the Governor specifically exempted them from proposed cuts in his budget balancing proposal. Since we are on our own, we must all make a maximum personal effort. Please send I. copies of any letters on this subject to the League offices. League of Minnesota Cities Number 4 For more information, contact John Tomlinson at 227 -5600 Cit y Views for Minnesota Legislators March 10, 1992 WHY CITIES ARE SHOCKED BY THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL A. THE PROPOSAL DESTROYS THE INTEGRITY OF THE DEDICATED LOCAL GOVERNMENT TRUST FUND LESS THAN ONE YEAR AFTER IT WAS CREATED. x Raids the local government trust fund by $198 million over three years. x Takes money from the 1 /2 -cent local option sales tax adopted in 1991 by local governments. B. THE PROPOSAL CREATES DRASTIC EFFECTS ON CITY BUDGETS THIS YEAR. x Cuts 8% of city revenue bases for calendar year 1992. x With the budget year partly gone, these cuts would be about 12% for the balance of the year. x These cuts are on top of cuts of 4% of city revenue bases enacted in the 1991 session for the 1992 budget year. x These cuts are on top of frozen city levy limits in 1992. x Examples of Governor's proposed cuts: Minneapolis--$ 15 million, St. Paul--$ 10 million, Duluth - -$2.2 million. C. THE PROPOSAL CREATES EXTREME UNFAIRNESS BETWEEN LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS. x City aid cuts are 29% of the total state budget cuts proposed by the Governor, while city aid is only 6.6% of the state budget. x No cuts for counties and townships, which provide many of the same services as cities. x Many cities receive no aid cuts (those getting HACA but no LGA), making the aid cuts to other cities higher. • • DON'T BUST THE 'il{UST • Printed an P itetrini NAME:> ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL ON CITY AID FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 ADA CITY -OF ADAMS CITY OF AFTON CITY OF AITKIN OF AKELEY CITY OF ALBANY: CITY OF . ALBERT LEA CITY OF ALBERTA CITY. OF ALBERTVILLE CITY OF ARDEN , CITY:OF:;:; ALDRICH CITY OF ALEXANO RIA:.CITY.OF. ALPHA CITY OF ALTURA CJTY.OF:; I ALVARADO CITY OF 'AMBOY ANDOVER CITY OF ANNANDALECITY OF ANOKA CITY OF APPLE VALLEY CITY OF APPLETON CITY OF ARCO CITY OF ARDEN HILLS CITY OF ARGYLECITY:OF ARLINGTON CITY OF ASHBY CITY OF ASKOV CITY OF ATWATER CITY OF AUDUBON CITY OF AURORA CITY AUSTIN CITY OF AVOCA CITY OF AVON CITY OF BABBITT CITY OF BACKUS CITY OF BADGER CITY OF..: BAGLEY CITY OF BALATON CITY BARNESVILLE CITY OF BARNUM CITY BARRETT CITY OF !BARRY CITYOF_. `: : 'BATTLE LAKE CITY OF 1 BAUDETTE CITY. OF.: BAXTER CITY OF BAYPORT CITY OF BEARDSLEY CITY OF I BEAVER BAY CITY OF 1 BEAVER CREEK CITY OF I BECKER CITY OF BEJOU CITY OF BELGRADE CITY OF 1 BELLE PLAINE CITY OF BELLECHESTER CITY OF BELLINGHAM CITY OF 1 BELTRAMI CITY 1 BELVIEW CITY OF 1 BEMIDJI CITY OF I BENA CITY OF PERCENT REVENUE 54,481 15,505 28,312 1,603 •:•31;757 6,803 37,556 471,815 2,034 31, :15,040 2631 3,126 5,949 2,061 15,819' 91,271 '41,950 319,044 346,439 56,644 2,038 0 1. 5;773 56,820 9,384 4,421 33,442 9,122 :79,871 616,288 2,143 21,883 50,776 6,131 7,926 31,373 28,0131 32,117 . 13,293 7,730 :.573 17,883 26,138 64,722 23,147 7,355 5,752 6,726 0 1,445 19,231 65,062 6,015 .1 10,5021 246,7651 1,6811 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020% I 0.308%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% .8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% - 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 4.620% I 8.020% 8.020% 4.072% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020% 1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% I 8.020% 1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 2.347% 1 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020%1 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%_ 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% BENSON CITY OF . BERTHA CITY OF BETHEL CITY OF .: BIG FALLS CITY OF BIGLAKE CITY OF . BIGELOW CITY OF BIGFORK CITY OF : BINGHAM LAKE CITY OF BIRCHWOOD CITY OF . BIRD ISLAND CITY OF BISCAY CITY OF - BIWABIK CITY OF BLACKDUCK CITY OF BLOMKEST.CITY OF . BLOOMING PRAIRIE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON CITY:OF BLUE EARTH CITY OF BLUFFTON CITY OF BOCK CITY OF BORUP CITY OF BOVEY CITY OF BOWLUS CITY OF > >:: BOY RIVER CITY OF BOYD .CITY BRAHAM CITY OF BRAINERD CITY OF 1 BRANCH CITY OF 1 BRANDON CITY 1 BRECKENRIDGE CITY OF 1 BREEZY POINT CITY OF BREWSTER CITY OF BRICELYN CITY OF BROOK PARK CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK CITY OF BROOKS CITY OF BROOKSTON CITY OF BROOTEN CITY OF': BROWERVILLE CITY OF BROWNS VALLEY CITY OF BROWNSDALE CITY OF BROWNSVILLE CITY OF BROWNTON CITY OF BRUNO CITY OF BUCKMAN CITY OF BUFFALO CITY OF BUFFALO LAKE CITY OF BUHL CITY OF BURNSVILLE CITY OF BURTRUM CITY OF BUTTERFIELD CITY OF BYRON CITY OF CALEDONIA CITY OF CALLAWAY CITY.OF CALUMET CITY OF CAMBRIDGE CITY OF CAMPBELL CITY OF CANBY CITY OF • CANNON FALLS CITY OF GOV'S PERCENT PROPOSED OF CUT AT ` , REVENUE 8.02% BASE 80,802 12,291 8,684 5,277 59,730 2,424 10,293 3,638 0 33,252 956 55,181 15,589 528,683 2,838 47,172 0 109,083 1,154 429 948 39,433 2,430 305 9,826 32,035 291,211 13,897 7,642 102,211 0 8,955 12,338 1,747 623,534 931,821 1,707 723 13,905 13,197 26,978 9,123 6,329 24,737 1,958 1,876 102,060 24,476 53,192 317,566 1,708 13,711 51,297 55,777 3,722 19,659 98,557 4,394 58,167 98,590 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 3.899%1 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020% I 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020%1 2.589% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% NAME ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL ON CITY AID FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 CANTON CITY OF. CARLOS CITY OF CARLTON.CITY OF, CARVER CITY OF CASS LAKE CITY OF CEDAR MILLS CITY OF CENTER CITY CITY OF CENTERVILLE CITY OF CEYLON CITY OF 1 CHAMPLIN CITY OF 1 CHANDLER CITY OF 1 CHANHASSEN CITY OF 1 CHASKA CITY OF CHATFIELD CITY OF CHICKAMAW BEACH CITY OF CHISAGO CITY CITY OF CHISHOLM CITY OF 1 CHOKIO CITY OF 1 CIRCLE PINES CITY OF CLARA CITY CITY OF CLAREMONT.CITY OF CLARISSA CITY OF 1 CLARKFIELD CITY OF 'CLARKS GROVE CITY OF 1 CLEAR LAKE CITY OF 1 CLEARBROOK CITY OF CLEARWATER CITY OF CLEMENTS CITY OF 1 CLEVELAND CITY OF 1 CLIMAX CITY OF 'CLINTON CITY OF CLITHERALL CITY OF CLONTARF CITY OF CLOQUET CITY OF COATES CITY OF COBDEN CITY OF 1 COKATO CITY OF 1 COLD SPRING CITY OF I COLERAINE CITY OF COLOGNE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY OF 1 COMFREY CITY OF 1 COMSTOCK CITY OF.:. I CONGER CITY OF I COOK CITY OF COON RAPIDS CITY OF CORCORAN CITY OF 1 CORRELL CITY OF 1 COSMOS CITY OF !COTTAGE GROVE CITY OF 1 COTTONWOOD CITY OF 1 COURTLAND CITY OF 1 CROMWELL CITY OF CROOKSTON CITY OF CROSBY CITY OF CROSSLAKE CITY OF CRYSTAL CITY OF CURRIE CITY OF CUYUNA CITY OF ' CYRUS CITY OF GOV'S ..; .. PROPOSED CUT AT 8.02% 7,737 3,920 21,546 18,824 30,530 123 6,777 6,462 14,560 247,524 5,295 0 118,063 61,221 0 46,985 245,157 11,435 72,892 34,157 13,519 16,706 37,906 8,285 5,942 10,375 13,752 3,977 12,423 6,870 16,255 1,085 678 356,858 0 213 42,279 54,882 54,523 13,334 419,632 17,332 1,001 3,065 13,383 763,524 16,203 464 14,023 453,107 24,772 7,528 4,258 242,269 63,478 0 458,244 5,422 3,060 5,679 PERCENT OF REVENUE BASE 8.020% 8.020% 8.020 %. 7.943% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 1.905% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% • 8.020% 8.020% - 8.020% 8.020% .8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% :8.020% 8.020% . 2.231% - 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% I 8.020%1 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% I 8.020% 1 8.020% 1 8.020%1 DAKOTA DALTON CITY OF DANVERS CITY OF DARFUR CITY DARWIN CITY OF DASSEL CITY OF DAWSON CITY OF DAYTON CITY DEEPHAVEN CITY OF DEER CREEK CITY OF DEER RIVER CITY OF DEERWOOD CITY OF . . DEGRAFF CITY OF DELANO CITY OF : DELAVAN CITY OF DELHI CITY OF DELLWOOD CITY OF DENHAM CITY.OF : . . DENNISON CITY OF DENT:CITY.OF:': DETROIT LAKES CITY OF DEXTER CITY DILWORTH CITY OF DODGE CENTER CITYOF DONALDSON CITY OF DONNELLY :CITY - OF; ;: : DORAN CITY OF DOVER CITY OF . DOVRAY CITY OF DULUTH CITY DUMONT CITY OF DUNDAS CITY OF: DUNDEE CITY OF DUNNELL CITY OF 1 EAGAN CITY OF EAGLE BEND CITY OF EAGLE LAKE CITY OF EAST BETHEL.CITY:OF : EAST GRAND FORKS CITY OF EAST GULL LAKE CITY OF . . EASTON CITY OF ECHO. CITY.OF::;;: ::::.:<:;: ,:: EDEN PRAIRIE CITY OF EDEN VALLEY CITY.OF EDGERTON CITY OF EDINA`CITY`.OF: EFFIE CITY OF EITZEN CITY OF I ELBA CITY OF 1 ELBOW LAKE CITY.OF 1 ELGIN CITY OF !ELIZABETH CITY: OF ELK RIVER CITY OF ELKO CITY OF 1 ELKTON CITY OF 1 ELLENDALE CITY OF . 1 ELLSWORTH CITY OF 1 ELMDALE CITY OF 1 ELMORE CITY OF GOV'S PERCENT _. • PROPOSED OF CUT AT REVENUE ,8.02% BASE .:::::<;: 3,540 :'8.020% 1 3,604 8.020 %, :: 16;786. 8.020% 2,114 8.020% `- :8.020% 683 8.020% 33,857. -8.020% 55,880 8.020% 32,431. . .4.320% 0 0.000% 5;271 8.020% 27,859 8.020% 17,615 8.020% 735 8.020% 51,119 8.020% 9,409 8.020% 1,637 . 8.020% 0 0.000% . .0 .. 0.000% 2,113 8.020% Y;459 '1 165,794 8.020% 8,563 8.020% 53,577 8.020% ;54;377 - 8.020% 751 8.020% .3,793 .. 8.020% 809 8.020% 6,662 8.020% 1,002 8.020% • ...2,244,748 8.020% 3,056 8.020% . 7,775. 8.020% 871 8.020% 5,233.. 8.020% 0 0.000% ._.15,792 8.020% 19,745 8.020% :.:65,642 8,020% 232,985 8.020% .0 0.000% 7,791 8.020% ;.9;485. 8.020% 0 0.000% .18,734 8.020% 23,869 8.020% 0. 0 :000% 76 8.020% :5,092 8.020% 552 8.020%1 39,994 8.020% 1 16,051 8.020% 2;453 8.020% 185,186 8.020%1 1,733 2.512% • 2,349 8.020% : 8,684 8.020% 12,755 8.020% • 1,071 8.020% 21,657 8.020% • NAM ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL ON CITY AID FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 ELROSACITY OF::'' ELY CITY OF ELYSIAN CITY. OF EMILY CITY OF EMMONS CITY:OF ERHARD CITY OF ERSKINE. CITY OF EVAN CITY OF EVANSVI LLE..CITY OF EVELETH CITY OF EXCELSIOR CITY OF EYOTA CITY OF FAIRFAX CITY OF FAIRMONT CITY OF FALCON.HEIGHTS CITY OF FARIBAULT CITY OF FARMINGTON CITY.OF FARWELL CITY OF FEDERAL DAM CITY OF. FELTON CITY OF FERGUS FALLS CITY: - OF FERTILE CITY OF FIFTY.LAKES: CITY OF: FINLAYSON CITY OF FISHER CITY OF FLENSBURG CITY OF FLOODWOOD CITY :OF FLORENCE CITY OF FOLEY CITY OF. • FORADA CITY OF FOREST LAKE CITY OF FORESTON CITY OF FORT RIPLEY CITY OF FORT SNELLING FOSSTON CITY OF FOUNTAIN CITY OF FOXHOME CITY OF:.. FRANKLIN CITY OF FRANKLIN CITY OF FRAZEE CITY OF FREEBORN CITY OF: FREEPORT CITY OF FRIDLEY. CITY FROST CITY OF FULDA CITY OF FUNKLEY CITY OF GARFIELD CITY OF. GARRISON CITY OF GARVIN CITY OF GARY CITY OF GAYLORD CITY OF GEM LAKE CITY OF GENEVA CITY OF GENOLA CITY OF GEORGETOWN CITY•OF GHENT CITY OF GIBBON CITY OF GILBERT CITY OF GILMAN CITY OF: GLENCOE CITY OF GOV'S • PERCENT PROPOSED OF. CUT AT:: REVENUE • BASE • 3,005 141,665 :15;708 4,901 1,457 12,143 824 10,180 178,912 62,440 22,644 35,563 296,620 64,980 422,440 _:139,278 1,558 537 3,492 337,680 18,898 0 2,854 4,702 2,286 21,242 923 • 41,640 884 122,300 4,165 160 0 36,184 8,118 1,392 15,541 1,489 17,281 : 5,045 13,853 499 8,645 34,315 4 1 ,850 2,447 4,683 6,377 56,750 0 7,264 0 1,884 5,510 24,069 85,962 358 118,108 • 8.020 %J 8.020% I 8.020%1 3.149%1 .020% 8.020%1 • 8.020% I 8.020% .. 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.0200 8.020% 8:020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% • 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 7.789% 8.020% 8.020% 3.671% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% I 8.020% . 8.020% J 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% I 0.000%1 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% I 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% I GLENVILLE CITY OF . I GLENWOOD CITY OF I GLYNDON CITY OF::;:::: 1 GOLDEN VALLEY CITY OF GONVICK CITY.OF. GOOD THUNDER CITY OF I GOODHUE CITY OF . GOODRIDGE CITY OF GOODVIEW CITY OF. GRACEVILLE CITY OF 'GRANADA CITY OF.. . GRAND MARAIS CITY OF GRAND MEADOW CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS CITY OF GRANITE FALLS CITY.OF GRASSTON CITY OF GREEN-ISLE CITY.OF. GREENBUSH CITY OF GREENFIELD CITY OF GREENWALD CITY OF GREENWOOD CITY OF I GREY EAGLE CITY OF I GROVE CITY CITY OF GRYGLA CITY OF I GULLY CITY OF HACKENSACK CITY OF HAD LEY CITY OF HALLOCK CITY OF HALMA CITY OF: . • HALSTAD CITY OF HAM LAKE CITY OF. HAMBURG CITY OF HAMMOND CITY OF HAMPTON CITY OF HANCOCK CITY OF I HANLEY FALLS CITY OF I HANOVER CITY OF HANSKA CITY OF HARDING CITY OF HARDWICK CITY OF HARMONY CITY OF HARRIS CITY OF HARTLAND .CITY OF HASTINGS CITY OF HATFIELD CITY OF HAWLEY CITY OF HAYFIELD CITY OF HAYWARD CITY OF HAZEL RUN CITY OF HECTOR CITY OF HEIDELBERG CITY OF HENDERSON CITY OF HENDRICKS CITY OF HENDRUM CITY OF HENNING CITY OF • HENRIETTE CITY OF HERMAN CITY OF ... HERMANTOWN CITY OF HERON LAKE CITY OF HEWITT CITY OF GOV'S PROPOSED CUT AT 8.02% 12,438 88,431 18,969 18,589 8,926 16,288 16,369 2,139 63,291 17,086 6,037 53,094 17,529 251,289 62,119 1,786 11,488 20,001 0 1,953 0 8,440 14,597 4,886 803 5,392 464 30,873 983 16,152 77,897 13,133 1,609 5,094 15,698 9,046 11,504 10,929 165 3,294 34,051 10,080 5,987 379,00& 672 22,126 41,032 4,570 936 45,256 293 22,303 15,863 6,518 20,400 306 14,055 111,178 18,735 4,379 PERCENT OF REVENUE BASE 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.257% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% I 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 7.983% 1 8.020% 8.020% I 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% I 8.020%1 8.020% I 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020%1 NAME ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL ON CITY AID FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 HIBBING CITY OF HILL CITY CITY OF HILLMAN. CITY OF HILLS CITY OF HILLTOP CITY.OF:. HINCKLEY CITY OF HITTERDAL CITY OF HOFFMAN CITY OF HOKAH CITY OF • HOLDINGFORD CITY OF HOLLAND CITY OF HOLLANDALE CITY OF HOLLOWAY CITY OF HOLT CITY OF HOPKINS CITY OF HOUSTON CITY OF HOWARD LAKE CITY OF HOYT LAKES CITY OF HUGO CITY OF . HUMBOLDT CITY OF HUTCHINSON CITY OF . IHLEN CITY OF INDEPENDENCE CITY OF INTL FALLS CITY OF INVER GROVE HT CITY IONA CITY OF IRON JUNCTION CITY OF IRONTON CITY OF ISANTI CITY. OF ISLAND VIEW CITY OF ISLE CITY OF IVANHOE CITY OF JACKSON CITY OF JANESVILLE CITY OF JASPER CITY OF 1 JEFFERS CITY OF ( JENKI NS CITY OF I JOHNSON CITY OF I JORDAN CITY OF I KANDIYOHI CITY OF I KARLSTAD CITY OF KASOTA CITY OF 1 KASSON CITY OF I KEEWATIN CITY OF I KELLIHER CITY OF 1KELLOGG CITY OF 1 KENNEDY CITY OF !KENNETH CITY OF 'KENSINGTON CITY OF KENT CITY OF KENYON CITY OF KERKHOVEN CITY OF KERRICK CITY OF KETTLE RIVER CITY OF KIESTER CITY OF KILKENNY CITY OF KIMBALL CITY OF KINBRAE CITY OF KINGSTON CITY OF . KINNEY CITY OF GOV'S PERCENT PROPOSED OF CUT AT REVENUE NAME 8.02% BASE 681,071 1 16,6251 10,7361 16;9201 26,401 5,026 10,458 19,096 21 „016 4,703 5,718 3,891 757 434,846 21,423 29,864 119,865 24,252 855 320,367 1,412 0 301,185 394,700 4,182 598 19,946 35,775 0 .13,390 15,664 112,670 38,882 12,420 8,652 2,680 468 62,571 7,765 24,332 6,270 . 74,461 54,462 2,948 6,325 9,104 1,206 5,294 1,730 55,052 13,444 521 4,461 16,2891 2,893 15,360 1337 1652 14,699 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020 °% 8.020 %. 8.020% •: 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 2.651 % 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000 %. 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% LACRESCENT CITY:OF; . LAFAYETTE CITY OF LAKE BENTON CITY.OF<c: LAKE BRONSON CITY OF LAKE CITY:CITY OF : . LAKE CRYSTAL CITY OF LAKE ELMO GITY..OF._ LAKE HENRY CITY OF LAKE LILLIAN CITY .OF - _.. LAKE PARK CITY OF LAKE SHORE CITY OF . _ LAKE ST CROIX BEACH CITY LAKE WILSON CITY OF LAKEFIELD CITY OF LAKELAND CITY. OF : LAKELAND SHORE CITY OF LAKEVILLE CITY OF: LAMBERTON CITY OF LANCASTER CITY OF LANDFALL CITY OF LANESBORO CITY LAPORTE CITY OF LAPRAIRIECITY OF LASALLE CITY OF LASTRUP CITY OF LAUDERDALE CITY OF LECENTER CITY LENGBY CITY OF LEONARD 'CITY OF LEONIDAS CITY OF LEROY. CITY OF LESTER PRAIRIE CITY OF LESUEUR CITY OF LEWISTON CITY OF LEWISVILLE CITY OF LEXINGTON CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF LINDSTROM CITY OF LINO LAKES CITY OF LISMORE CITY OF LITCHFIELD CITY OF LITTLE CANADA CITY OF LITTLE FALLS- CITY:OF; .. LITTLEFORK CITY OF LONG BEACH CITY-.OF LONG LAKE CITY OF LONG PRAIRIE CITYOF :: LONGVILLE CITY OF LONSDALE,CITY OF LORETTO CITY OF LOUISBURG CITY OF. LOWRY CITY OF LUCAN CITY OF LUVERNE CITY OF LYLE CITY OF.: LYND CITY OF MABEL CITY OF MADELIA CITY OF MADISON CITY OF :: »`... MADISON LAKE CITY OF GOV'S PERCENT PROPOSED`: OF CUT AT : REVENUE 8.02% BASE 68;709 8.020% 13,898 8.020% 21;7361:" 8.020% 6,8841 8.020% :; :: ..:: 8.020% 42,371 8.020% :;'.:O 1..:: 0.000% 7301 8.020% :'..6,2211 • • 8.020% 13,7091 8.020% O j 0.000% 7,000 ( 3.988 %1 6,9691 8.020% 1 56,6711 8.020%1 0 0.000%1 0 0.000%1 437,8771 8.020% 1 25,1051 8.020%1 7,2521 8.020% 01 0.000% 25,8771 8.020% 7381 8.020% 9,5201 8.020% 1,111 8.020% 9611:::.. :: 8.020% 31,372 7.072% 39,437: :: 8.020% 2,552 8.020% 203 8.020% 5,907 8.020% 17,0291 8:020 %0 35,7431 8.020% 86,1381 8.020% 22,7561 8.020% 4,5631 :8.020% 32,6351 8.020% 01 0.000% 47,1331 8.020% 137,0301 : 7.017% 5,9771 8.020% 137,0741 8.020% 64,1401 3.471% 194,0191 :. :8.020% 12,3701 8.020% 0 :. 0.000% 48,244 6.834% 55,183 8.020% 4,127 8.020% 21;638 > ::8.020% 8,128 8.020% 713 8.020% 6,5911 8.020% 6;7261 ' .. :.8.020% 108,3601 8.020% 13,0301 .: :.8.020% 6,774 8.020% 21,278 •8.020% 51,447 8.020% 62,408 8.020% 14,443 8.020% ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL ON CITY AID FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 NAM MAGNOLIA.CITY: OF: MAHNOMEN CITY OF MAHTOMEDI CITY OF: MANCHESTER CITY OF MANHATTAN B.EACH.CITY OF MANKATO CITY OF MANTORVILLE :CITY .OF :•• MAPLE GROVE CITY OF [MAPLE LAKE.:CITY OF , .. ;:.,.::::: !MAPLE PLAIN CITY OF I MAPLETON:CITYQF : : 1 MAPLEVIEW CITY OF MAPLEWOOD: CITY OF MARBLE CITY OF !MARIETTA CITY OF 1 MARINE -ON- STCROIX CITY I 1 MARSHALL CITY OF • -. I MAYER CITY OF MAYNARD CITY OF. : MAZEPPA CITY OF MCGRATH .OF: MCGREGOR CITY OF MCINTOSH :CITY. OF. MCKINLEY CITY OF • MEADOWLANDS:CITY.OF.:..: MEDFORD CITY OF MEDICINE LAKE :CITY•OF MEDINA CITY OF MEIRE GROVECITY,OF MELROSE CITY OF MENAHGA CITY .OF MENDOTA CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY. OF MENTOR CITY OF MIDDLE RIVER CITY OF MIESVILLE CITY OF MILACA CITY OF MILAN CITY OF MILLERVILLE CITY OF MILLVILLE CITY OF MILROY CITY .OF MILTONA CITY OF MINN CITY>CITY;OF. MINN LAKE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS CITY OF • MINNEISKA CITY OF MINNEOTA CITY OF :I • MINNETONKA BEACH CITY OF MINNETONKA CITY OF MINNETRISTA CITY OF MIZPAH CITY.OF • MONTEVIDEO CITY OF MONTGOMERY•CITY OF • MONTICELLO CITY OF MONTROSE.CITY OF MOORHEAD CITY OF MOOSE LAKE CITY OF MORA CITY OF MORGAN CITY OF . • !MORRIS CITY OF PERCENT PROPOSED OF CUT AT:: REVENUE <:<8:02% BASE: 31,892 102,152 588 872,428 :;1.9;389 122,916 30,841 39,320 •31;094 5,818 627,214 32,819 6,090 0 '241';070 7,313 •:.1.0 11,601 • ':181 9,662 14;431 8,662 2,951 18,343 0 1,524 59,932 5,462 0 1,832 3,119 0 50,993 11,346 80 804 .8,232 3,807 3,393 23,237 '14659;165 1,214 31,902 0 0 0 • 348 157,552 • 77,289 0 -• 16,817 552,018 26,330 54,482 ..35,052 137,082 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% • »:.0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 1.483% 8.020% 6.666% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 7.457% 0.000% 8.020% .: 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% .8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% MORRISTOWN. CITY.OF: MORTON CITY OF MOUND CITY OF .MOUND.S <VIEW.CITY:.OF.: MSP INTERNATIONAL AIRPOR MT..IRON MT LAKE CITY OF MURDOCK OF MYRTLE CITY OF NASHUA CITY.OF NASHWAUK CITY OF NASSAU CITY OF NELSON CITY OF NERSTRAND.CITY OF NEVIS CITY OF NEW AUBURN CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON CITY OF NEW GERMANY.CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY OF NEW - LONDON CITY.:OF NEW MARKET CITY OF NEW MUNICH CITY OF NEW PRAGUE CITY OF NEW RICHLAND CITY:•OF NEW TRIER CITY OF NEW ULM CITY OF: NEW YORK MILLS CITY OF NEWFOLDEN CITY.OF. NEWPORT CITY OF NICOLLET CITY NIELSVILLE CITY OF NIMROD- VILLAGE OF.. - NISSWA CITY OF NORCROSS CITY OF NORTH BRANCH CITY OF NORTH MANKATO CITY OF NORTH OAKS CITY OF NORTH REDWOOD CITY OF NORTH ST PAUL CITY OF NORTHFIELD CITY OF NORTHOME CITY OF NORTHROP CITY OF NORWOOD CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS CITY OF OAKDALE CITY OF ODESSA CITY OE:: ODIN CITY OF OGEMA CITY OF OGILVIE CITY OF OKABENA CITY OF OKLEE CITY OF OLIVIA CITY OF • ONAMIA CITY OF ORMSBY CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONOCO CITY OF 1 ORR CITY OF • 1 ORTONVILLE CITY OF.. IOSAKIS CITY OF GOV'S PERCENT PROPOSED OF CUT AT REVENUE 8.02% BASE 15,122 8.020%1 14,761 8.020%1 10,277 . 8.020% 1 158,120 8.020%1 173,112 8.020%1 0 0.000%1 119,382 8.020%1 61,155 8.020%1 6,655 8.020% 1 687 8.020% 392 6.605% 61,344 8.020% 1,085 8.020% 962 8.020% 4,404 8.020% 6,534 8.020% 4,319 8.020% 302,900 8.020% 5,742 8.020% 421,527 8.020% 21,473 8.020% 5,795 8.020% 3,809 8.020% 103,512 8.020% 26,070 8.020% 413 8.020%1 345,939 8.020 %1 27,328 8.020%1 7,106 8.020%1 84,643 8.020% 1 12,3711 . 8.020%1 2,457 8.020%1 465 8.020%1 0 0.000%1 3,123 8.020%1 38,741 8.020%1 258,994 8.020% - - 0.000% 2,769 8.020% 146,875 8.020% 286,624 8.020% 5,781 8.020%1 4,257 8.020 %1 25,495 8.020 %1 0 0.000 %1 303,367 4,369 2,138 3,059 9,945 6,574 11,738 73,152 9,247 2,2481 01 8,6781 5,7041 88,551 34,660 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% NAME ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL ON CITY AID FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 OSLO CITY OF OSSEO CITY OF OSTRANDER CITY OF OTSEGO CITY OF OTTERTAIL CITY OF OWATONNA CITY OF PALISADE CITY OF PARK RAPIDS CITY OF PARKERS PRAIRIE CITY OF PAYNESVILLE CITY OF PEASE CITY OF PELICAN RAPIDS CITY OF PEMBERTON CITY OF PENNOCK CITY OF PEQUOT LAKES CITY OF PERHAM CITY OF PERLEY CITY. OF PETERSON CITY OF PIERZ,CITY OF - PILLAGER CITY OF PINE CITY CITY. OF PINE ISLAND CITY OF PINE RIVER CITY OF PINE SPRINGS CITY OF PIPESTONE CITY OF PLAINVIEW CITY OF PLATO CITY OF 1 PLEASANT LAKE CITY OF 1 PLUMMER CITY OF 1 PLYMOUTH CITY OF !PORTER CITY OF !PRESTON CITY OF I PRINCETON CITY OF 1 PRINSBURG CITY OF j PRIOR LAKE CITY OF 1 PROCTOR CITY OF 1 QUAMBA CITY OF 1 RACINE CITY OF 1 RAMSEY CITY OF 1 RANDALL CITY OF I RANDOLPH CITY OF - 1 RANIER CITY OF 1 RAYMOND CITY OF 1 RED LAKE FALLS CITY OF 1 RED WING CITY OF . . 1 REDWOOD FALLS CITY OF 1 REGAL CITY OF 1 REMER CITY OF RENVILLE CITY OF j REVERE CITY OF !RICE CITY OF 1 RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHMOND CITY OF RICHVILLE CITY OF RIVERTON CITY OF ROBBINSDALE CITY OF ROCHESTER CITY OF ROCK CREEK CITY OF 1 ROCKFORD CITY OF 1 ROCKVILLE CITY OF PERCENT PROPOSED OF CUT AT :. REVENUE 8.02% BASE 12,220 40,302 6,139 32,529 0 482,655 1,039 56,802 17,336 68,113 910 37,178 4,230 6,846 21,486 40,050 1,446 3,132 12,487 9,361 53,840 73,371 21,137 0 103,532 69,259 9,056 0 10,239 0 4,334 48,377 87,449 11,665 26,989 70,276 352 3,334 141,055 7,444 2,679 1,938 14,365 52,620 38,442 153,517 297 7,385 45,014 3,058 10,728 791,139 18,219 1 8.020% j 8.020%1 8.020%1 7.117% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.953% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.427% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020% I 8.020% I 8.020% 782 L* 8.020% 1965 8.020% 316 884 1,672 659 7 192 53 343 7 672 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% NAME. ROGERS CITY OF i ROLLINGSTONE CITY OF RONNEBY ROOSEVELT CITY OF ROSCOE CITY OF : ' - ROSE CREEK CITY OF ROSEAU CITY-.0F • >: ROSEMOUNT CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITY OF: ROTHSAY CITY OF ROUND LAKE CITY OF_. ROYALTON CITY OF RUSH CITY CITY OF .- - RUSHFORD CITY OF RUSHFORD VILLAGE CITY OF RUSHMORE CITY OF RUSSELL CITY :OF .. RUTHTON CITY OF RUTLEDGE CITY -O F SABIN CITY OF SACRED HEART CITY OF. SANBORN CITY OF SANDSTONE CITY SARGEANT CITY OF SARTELL SAUK CENTRE CITY OF SAUK RAPIDS CITY OF SAVAGE CITY OF SCANLON CITY OF SEAFORTH CITY OF SEBEKA CITY. OF SEDAN CITY OF SHAFER CITY OF ::..: 1 SHAKOPEE CITY OF SHELLYCITY"OF. SHERBURN CITY OF SHEVLIN CITY I SHOREVIEW CITY OF SHOREWOOD. CITY. OF. •':..':' SILVER BAY CITY OF SILVER LAKE CITY OF SKYLINE CITY OF SLAYTON CITY OF : SLEEPY EYE CITY OF SOBIESKI CITY.OF. SOLWAY CITY OF SOUTH HAVEN • SOUTH ST PAUL CITY OF SPICER CITY OF I SPRING GROVE CITY OF SPRING HILL CITY OF . SPRING LAKE PARK CITY OF SPRING PARK CITY OF SPRING VALLEY CITY OF SPRINGFIELD CITY OF SQUAW LAKE CITY OF ST ANTHONY CITY OF • • ST ANTHONY CITY OF ST BONIFACIUS -CITY OF ST CHARLES CITY OF GOV.'S PROP.OSED::.:: OF CUT AT . REVENUE:.. 8.02% BASE "< 0 12,928 I 8.020% 1 2891 .. 8.020%1 378 I 8.020% 1 1,2391- 8 6,4641 8.020% 1 58,3201 °8.020 %I 243,4961 8.020% .:01 • .0.000% 8,2751 8.020% 8,6831 8.020% 10,3101 8.020% 30,320 8.020% 36,434 8.020% 11,1091 8.020% 8,8621 8.020% 11,8921- • ' 8.020% 5,5181 8.020% . 627 : .. 6.934% 7,395 8.020% :. 18,447 ::::;: 8.020% 11,774 8.020% >::....:8.020 %1 1,040 8.020% 79,607 : ; 8.020% 105,986 8.020% - 146;150 8.020% 50,231 2.154% • 25,315 8.020 %1 1,699 8.020%1 .18,563 .8.020%1 217 8.020%1 5,129 8.020% 142,925 5.182% 5,343 i 8:020%1 41,2171 8.020%1 1,090 :.. . 8.020% 0 0.000% 0 .. , :::0.000% 83,778 8.020% 19,642 • .8.020%1 2,585 8.020% 1 65,462 . 8.020 % 88,345 8.020% • 690 8.020% 810 8.020% 2,599 .:.8.020% 507,522 8.020% 28,299 8.020% 36,814 8.020% 887. :8.020% 93,115 8.020% 0 .. ..'0.000% 74,377 8.020% 64,589 8.020% 6361 8.020% 127,3161 7.376% I 4441 8.020%1 4,2541 ::::•.1.525%1 56,0961 8.020%1 ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL ON CITY AID FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 ST: CLAI R.CITY:OF::::: ST CLOUD CITY OF ST.FRANCIS CITY:OF • - ST HILAIRE CITY OF STJAME$ CITY ST JOSEPH CITY OF ST LEO CITY OF > • ST LOUIS PARK CITY OF ST IVIARTIN:CITY OF:::: • ST MARYS POINT CITY OF SIMICHAEL CITY OF.. ST PAUL CITY OF ST PAUL PARK CITY OF ST PETER CITY OF ST:ROSA;CITY:OF: <:: ST STEPHEN CITY OF ST: > \INCENT CITY OF STACY CITY OF STAPLES CITY STARBUCK CITY OF STATE.FAIR.GROUNDS STEEN CITY OF STEPHEN CITY OF: STEWART CITY OF STEWARTVILLE CITY; OF STILLWATER CITY OF STOCKTON..CITY OF STORDEN CITY OF STRANDQUIST:CITYOF. • STRATHCONA CITY OF 'STURGEON LAKE CITY OF 1 SUNBURG CITY OF 8,841 1,335,171 25,136 4,790 96,037 43,400 1,082 1,008,535 • 2,504 0 30,3101 9,818,1251 88,022 163,412 5491 7,3051 8901 8,1871 85;5621 27,9121 01 1,5481 14,7501 21,349 :71,676 339,083 4,680 13,337 1,008 262 2,376 2,342 SUNFISH LAKE CITY OF 0 SWANVILLE CITY OF 5,638 TACONITE CITY OF TAMARACK CITY OF TAOPI.CITY OF ..: TAUNTON CITY OF TAYLORS FALLS CITY OF 1 TENNEY CITY OF 1 TENSTRIKE CITY OF THIEF RIVER FALLS CITY OF 1 THOMSON CITY OF TINTAH CITY OF TONKA BAY CITY OF TOWER CITY OF TRACY CITY OF TRAIL CITY OF TRIMONT CITY OF TROMMALD CITY OF TROSKY CITY OF TRUMAN CITY OF TURTLE RIVER CITY OF TWIN LAKES CITY OF TWIN VALLEY CITY OF TWO HARBORS CITY OF TYLER CITY OF ULEN CITY OF UNDERWOOD CITY OF ' I UPSALA CITY OF 19,140 815 3391 1,6151 20,958 1931 5551 192,091 3,931 1,276 0 16,150 70,245 . 600 25,760 1,425 392 31,570 7 3,718 18,957 117,218 26,587 12,173 6,865 6,960 PERCENT REVENUE'::. 8.020% 8.020% 4.956% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020% 1 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8,020% 8.020%1 1.400%1 8.020%1 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% URBANK CITY OF UTICA CITY OF VADNAIS HEIGHTS CITY OF . VERGAS CITY OF VERMILLION CITY VERNDALE CITY OF VERNON CENTER CITY OF VESTA CITY OF VICTORIA CITY..OF.- VIKING CITY OF VILLARD CITY OF VINING CITY OF VIRGINIA CITY OF WABASHA CITY OF WABASSO CITY-OF WACONIA CITY OF WADENA CITY 1 WAHKON CITY OF WAITE PARK CITY OF WALDORF CITY OF WALKER CITY.OF WALNUT GROVE CITY OF WALTERS CITY OF WALTHAM CITY OF WANAMINGO CITY OF WANDA CITY OF • WARBA CITY OF WARREN CITY OF WARROAD CITY OF WASECA CITY OF WATERTOWN.CITY OF WATERVILLE CITY OF WATKINS CITY OF WATSON CITY OF WAUBUN CITY OF WAVERLY CITY OF WAYZATA CITY OF WELCOME CITY OF WELLS CITY OF WENDELL CITY OF WEST CONCORD CITY OF WEST ST PAUL CITY OF WEST UNION CITY OF WESTBROOK CITY OF WESTPORT CITY OF WHALAN CITY OF WHEATON CITY OF - WHITE BEAR LK CITY OF WILDER CITY OF . WILLERNIE CITY OF WILLIAMS CITY OF WILLMAR CITY OF WILLOW RIVER CITY OF WILMONT CITY OF WILTON CITY OF WINDOM CITY OF WINGER CITY OF 1 WINNEBAGO CITY OF 1 WINONA CITY OF 1 WINSTED CITY OF GOV'S PERCENT PROPOSED OF CUT AT REVENUE 8.02% BASE 419 3,336 0 2,018 810 9,085 8,386 8,011 0 2,019 5,139 1,127 490,587 76,689 16,933 86,716 76,408 3,203 119,014 6,680 37,851 17,361 2,600 3,504 21,845 1,777 1,493 28,619 28,696 189,732 32,221 41,421 20,896 7,590 5,729 22,072 0 19,714 65,190 4,901 18,042 396,677 395 23,262 214 1,405 52,281 312,922 1,175 10,613 3,320 362,252 2,969 6,012 0 118,0981 5,4361 42,701 1 693,2751 43,8721 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 0.965% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020%1 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 0.000% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% 8.020% NAME ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL ON CITY AID. FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 !WINTHROP CITY OF 1 WINTON CITY OF WOLF LAKE CITY OF WOLVERTON, CITY OF WOOD .LAKE CITY OF WOODBURY CITY OF WOODLAND CITY OF WOODSTOCK CITY OF WORTHINGTON CITY OF GOV'S PROPOSED CUT AT ,:_. 8.02% PERCENT OF REVENUE BASE 35,807 8.020%1 2,970 8.020%1 78 8.020% 3,181 8.020% 10,730 8.020 %. 0 0.000% 0 0.000% 3,2341 8.020% 295,2631 8.020% NAME .. • WRENSHALL.CITY::OF WRIGHT CITY OF I W.YKOFF CITY OF:.' ::;::: . 1 WYOMING CITY OF YOUNG :CITY.OF.: ZEMPLE CITY OF 1 ZIMMERMAN=CITY OF > :: 1 ZUMBRO FALLS CITY OF 1 ZUMBROTA CITY; • 1TOTALS GOV'S PERCENT PROPOSED OF CUT AT REVENUE 8.02% BASE 7,098 8.020%1 304 1.366%1 12,373 -. 8.020% 35,154 8.020% 25;527 ::::.8:020 %1 435 8.020% 31;361 2,517 8.020% 63,042 8:020% 1 $71,600,0001 6.687% prepared by: The League of Minnesota Cities 10— Mar -92 • • • Maglawsibar Neaa® Mammy ME ME ��+► 11� g Man inaa�l sp SE MIN Board of Trustees Minutes Annual Meeting February 4, 1992 Present: Cass, Childs, Engebretson, Freeman, Schmidt, Welshons, and Bertalmio. 1. Call to order: There being a quorum present the meeting was called to order at 6:45 pm by President Schmidt. 2. Minutes of the 1991 Annual fleeting Motion to accept the minutes of.the 1991 Annual Meeting as mailed. Seconded. Passed Unanimously. 3. Elections for the period until February meeting in 1994. Childs nominated for secretary. Motion to close nominations for secretary. Seconded. Passed unanimously. Engebretson nominated for vice - president. Motion to close nominations for vice - president. Seconded. Passed unanimously. Schmidt nominated for vice - president. Motion to close nominations for president. Seconded. Passed unanimously. Motion to accept nominees by unanimous ballot. Seconded. Passed without dissent. 4. Committee appointments. With the addition of Welshons to Finance and Budget Committee Schmidt made the appointments as noted in the list mailed. 5. All agenda items being completed and no other business being before the Board President Schmidt adjourned the Annual Meeting at 6:52 pm. • 7he &void 64 Comm-di d S14/ co/ix/jai/A ude a/ die dedicaticept aid podia,/ cancel/al/614 ceitemoku h aimiza, ate Hew poid tqpia 26, 1992 02.00 pm. 14 5 :00 pm. Opet y evtemai, e2.00 pm. 0294 Illo4,a 34d Shed &, r , MAI 55003 • • You are cordially invited to an Eggs N' Issues Breakfast with Lee Ronning Board Director with the Washington County Lan&Trust Friday, March 20th from 7:30 AM 9:00 AM at the Lake Elmo Inn 3442 Lake Elmo Ave. N. Lake Elmo, Minnesota Sponsored by the Stillwater Area Chamber of Commerce Governmental Affairs Committee and Marland Corp. Norwest Bank $10.00 - Members • $12.00 Non - members R.S.V.P. to the Chamber office by March 18 at 439 -7700 • STILLWATER AREA SCHOOLS March 16, 1992 Wally Abrahamson, Mayor City of Stillwater City Hall 216 N. Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Wally: The School Board of District 834 has scheduled a public meeting for Monday, April 6, 7:00 p.m. at Washington School for the purpose of discussing the possible disposition of the Washington School Building, playground and other district owned property in the neighborhood. The School Board is interested in hearing citizens comments and concerns regarding this matter and is encouraging all interested parties to attend this public meeting. Recognizing the interest on the part of some of the neighbors to have some of our property turned into a city park the School Board requested that I offer an invitation to the City of Stillwater in hopes that you may have some representation at this meeting. David L. Wettlrgren Superintendent of Schools DLW/ j e • Board of Education Effective Learning Through Excellence in Education 1875 SOUTH GREELEY STREET STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 430 -8200 • V -TDD STEVE ZINNEL Chairperson LOUISE JONES Vice Chairperson SUZANNE THOMSEN Clerk LYNN SCHMIDT Treasurer An Equal Opportunity Employer LYMAN GEARY KAREN ROSE Director Director ROLAND BUCHMAN DAVID WETTERGREN Director Superintendent • • • WORKERS' COMPENSATION COALITION SIX CRITICAL PRINCIPLES FOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION REFORM 1. Tax free workers compensation benefits should never exceed the value of taxable wages. Currently most injured workers receive at least 2/3 of their wage, tax free. For workers in high tax brackets this may be at or above the value of their taxable wages. Workers making under $214 a week get 100% of their wage tax free. Minors and apprentices get $428 a week regardless of what they are earning. All workers should receive 80% of their after tax earnings for weekly workers compensation benefit. 2. Eliminate long -term pension benefits for people without serious disabilities. Currently, liberal court decisions provide that an employee may be declared permanently totally disabled because of labor market conditions in his community even with a relatively minor injury and that previously injured employees can go back on workers compensation benefits virtually indefinitely throughout their lives. Employers should not be expected to take over responsibility for an employee's job security just because of a minor injury in the distant past. 3. Eliminate double- dipping. Currently workers compensation claimants can draw simultaneously workers compensation benefits, workers compensation supplemental benefits, social security benefits and private pension benefits. These programs should be coordinated and no worker should be allowed to receive benefits that, together exceed the value of the pre -injury wage. 4. Reduce excessive litigation. Minnesota has much higher litigation rates than our surrounding states. Litigation increases costs and conflict between employers and employees and reduces the likelihood of amicable cost effective resolution of disputes. 5. Control rapidly escalating medical costs. Workers compensation is the only medical reimbursement system left in the country which provides reimbursement billed costs with few effective limits. State of the art medical control methods must be implemented. 6. Depoliticize the appeals process. Currently Workers' Compensation Appeals judges are the only judges who depend for reappointment on a partisan elected political official. In the past this has resulted in heavy politicization of the Court of Appeals and decisions that have seriously undermined the legislative intent of cost control bills. Workers' compensation appeals should go into the regular court system as in the case in the overwhelming majority of other states. • I) Benefits Should Not Exceed the Value of Taxable Wages • • Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) Min. lowered Same Same min. lowered to to 20% SAWW 35% SAWW (raise max - 105% (same, except (raise max - 110% (same as S.F. 1820) SAWW) effective date is 2 SAWW) years later) 2) minors & apprentices - imputation of 105% SAWW to PT's only 3) 80% after - tax weekly benefit formula (Note: All comparisons are to S.F. 596, unless otherwise indicated) Same Same 1 not included not included not included not included II) Keeps Temporary Benefits What They Were Intended to be -- i.e. Temporary Gov Hot Chm . _ Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) TP cut -off same, except 364 same, except 5 same, except 5 3 yrs /350 wk wk max. yrs /450 wk max yrs /450 wk max. max. 2) TP reduced not included Same same, but 500% - athletes SAWW provision 300% SAWW 2 • • • III) Restrict Long -term Benefits to Medically Serious Disability Cases Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) PT ceases same, plus not included not included at retirement "retirement" defined 2) PT eligibil- ity -can't consider local labor market conditions Moving expenses of $5,000 not included same reasonable moving expenses retraining assessment for worker who would be PT but f o r n o t considering local labor market conditions • 3 not included not included not included not included not included not included Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) Annual COLA adj. capped at 4% 1st adj. delayed to same, except 3rd anniversary delayed to 2nd date anniversary date 2) Supplemental benefits - coordinate SS with WC to determine eligibility IV) Curtail Double Escalation of Benefits same same same same same as S.F. 1820 same as S.F. 1820 not included not included supps limited to same not included not included PT's reduce supps level retains supps level not included not included to 50% SAWW at 65% SAWW retro effect 4 years no retro effect not included not applicable not included a n n u a l not included not included appropriation from GF to reimburse SC Fund at 60% of supps pd 4 • • • • V) Reduce Excessive Litigation/Simplify or Expedite the Dispute Resolution Process Gov S.F. 596 1) Eliminate2 tier PPD benefit system replace with Wisc. refusal to rehire penalty 2) Addresses Weber case - no PPD if not on rating schedule 3) Stop case splitting by increasing pl. atty fees to $15,000 (cumulative for a case) w /out approval by comm. or comp. judge eliminating all other separate atty fees related to the same injury hrly fees limited to discontinuance conferences 4) Atty hrs reporting req on pl. attys fees and applications for excess fees Hot S.F. 1820 same not included same, except if PPD not rated is assigned rating for most similar cond. that is rated same, but $15,000 per case limit also applies to def. attys fees same same same, plus reporting reqmts. also for def. attys hrs, avg. hrly wage or rate, and value of hrs wrkd 5 Chm S.F. (4 bills) not included not included same as S.F. 1820 same as H.F. 1952 not included same same as S.F. 1820 Ruk H.F. 1952 not included not applicable not included not included - current limit of $6500 w /out approval still applies - also $6500 limit now applies to employer and insurer atty fees; not included allows hrly fees for adm. conf. disputes (medical, r e h a b, discontinuances) same as per S.F. 1820 V) Litigation (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F 1952 5) N o t included not included not included annual reporting requirements for insurers and self - insurers legal fees and legal costs 6) n o t all adm. conf. to not included same as S.F. 1820 included determine issues must be held within 150 mi. of employee's residence 7) medical and rehab adm. conferences eliminated - discontinuance of benefits adm. conf. retained 8) occupational diseases - payment to be made by employer and insurer on date of last exposure 9) establishes small claims court for medical and rehab claims not in excess of $5,000 same same same 6 not included not included same not included same not included • • 12) limits "for same same not included cause" grounds for setting aside • awards on appeal 13) n o t comp judge block same as S.F. 1820 same as S.F. 1820 included system to ensure same judge remains with case to conclusion • V) Litigation (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 10) n o t limits grounds for same as S.F. 1820 not included included appeal to WCCA by adding to current grounds a "clearly erroneous" standard 11) n o t limits power of limits power of not included included WCCA to make WCCA t o its own findings substitute its own of fact or judgment as to substitute its own weight and judgment as to credibility of the weight and evidence or any credibility of the finding of fact evidence or any finding of fact 14) n o t expedited appeals same as S.F. 1820 same as S.F. 1820 included for certified important and doubtful questions 15) n o t chief OAH judge same as S.F. 1820 not included included to reduce formality and length of hearings 7 V) Litigation (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 16) n o t not included not included binding arbitration included by neutral arbitrator for benefits disputes submitted with consent of all interested parties; arbitration costs paid by all parties, except employees, on a pro -rata basis 17) n o t not included same as H.F. 1952 employer or included employee request DOLI for legal advice and assistance -refer to DOLI atty - -DOLI to make efforts to settle problems between parties & with 3rd parties 8 • VI) Control Escalating Medical & Rehab Costs /Increase Incentives to Manage Claims Better Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) 2nd injury same, plus limit repeals 2nd injury not included fund - raise min. reimbursement fund altogether disability rating rate to 75% and requirement to raise threshold to 25% $3500 2) eliminate mandatory rehab requirement - make upon request of any party change of QRC within 30 days of initial QRC contact QRC fee schedule to be established • by rule plan approval required if not completed within 6 mo. or $3,000 3) mediation services for med. & rehab disputes same change allowed within 60 days same same, except $5,000 and thereafter comm. to annually review plan progress; QRC to evaluate for retraining surviving spouse entitled to add'l comp. during retraining if judge determines mines is necessary to ensure spouse is self- supporting same • 9 same same same same same same same as S.F. 1820 same, except $3600 and comm. to review progress thereafter not included same as S.F. 1820 not included not included VI) Medical (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 4) limits on same, but 90 not included not included chiropractic days /or 40 treatments - 30 treatments days /or 15 treatments 5) limits on same, but 90 days not included not included physical therapy treatments - 30 days 6) 1 9 9 0 same same same medical study recommendations - excessive fees same same same - prescribed same same same billing forms - certification & same same same enrollment 7) Failure to same not included not included obtain 2nd surgical opinion if required by employer or ins. is not reason for non - payment unless comm. or comp. judge determines the surgery was not reasonably required. 10 • VI) Medical (cont.) • Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 8) managed managed care managed care managed care care • • certification of individual health care providers (very broad) treatment by non- similar member who maintains wkr's medical records and who has history of treating wkr, if rules followed and specialized treatments referred to member provider certification of p l a n n o t individual health care providers - plan must have geographic accessibility (more restrictive) not included not included 11 same as S.F. 1820 same similar transitional exception to managed care t r e a t m e n t requirement except in emergencies or when authorized by a comp. judge or commissioner, treatment must be provided by a certified managed care health care provider (most broad of all - essentially guts the concept) not included VI) Medical (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 9) relative fee same, but also same as S.F. 1820, similar to S.F. value schedule - would potentially e x c e p t 1820 1 5 % overall cover outpatient & implementation reduction large hospital dates as per S.F. inpatient charges; 596 also faster imple. timeline 10) hospital charges - both inpatient & outpatient limited to 85% (or actual charges for hosp. with 100 or fewer acute care beds) 12) occupational disease - medical benefits paid in the case of disablement only inpatient small hospitals (100 or fewer beds) charges shall be usual and customary charges unless comp judge determines to be unreasonably excessive 11) medical same, but shall be charges not 80% of usual and covered by fee customary charge schedule or as or prevailing hospital per above charge in - shall be community, providers' actual whichever is less charge or prevailing charge in community, whichever is less same 12 same as S.F. 1820 same as S.F. 1820 except small hospital is 50 or fewer beds same as S.F. 1820 same as S.F. 1820 except 85% same not included • • • VI) Medical (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 13) n o t employer same as S.F. 1820 same as S.F. 1820 included physician exams must be held within 150 mi. of employee's residence unless good cause showing 14) n o t rules to be same asS.F.1820 rules to be included adopted to limit adopted estab. charges for indep. fees for employer and adverse physician & medical exams by neutral physician any party exams 15) n o t medical coverage not included not included included study - feasibility of providing WC medical coverage through other health insurance mechanisms, including 24 -hr coverage concept 16) n o t not included DOLI to study not included included number and severity of work - related repetitive motion injuries incurred by state employees (incl. carpal tunnel); DOLI to develop a pilot project to reduce repetitive motion injuries • 13' VI) Medical (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 17) n o t not included Commissioner of not included included DOLI to study utilization of high technology m e d i c a l procedures for treatment of WC injuries - report results to legislature by 1/1/93 18) n o t not included ARP must utilize not included included man. care plans to the extent possible 19) n o t not included ARP must not included included implement a medical cost 20) n o t not included insurers and self- not included included insurers to assist the commissioner in monitoring medical treatment by reporting cases of suspected ineffective, inappropriate, or unnecessary treatment (as defined by MSR Bd) - Med. Serv. Rev. Bd to review those cases and m a k e determinations - commissioner may impose sanctions - sanctions may be appealed 14 • • • VII) Depoliticizes the Appeals Process Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) abolishes retains WCCA, same as S.F. 1820 not included WCCA and but requires notice transfers functions to state atty to CA with 5 new associations and j u d g e s all forms of public (appropriation) media as to vacancies; Gov. to appoint vacancies I 15 VIII) Promote Safer Workplaces Gov Hot Chin Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) n o t Health & Safety Assigned Risk same as S.F. 1820 included Commission & Safety Fund Fund established established not applicable not applicable funded through same as S.F. 1820, same as S.F. 1820, WC penalties now except funded except funded paid into SC fund only by WC law only by WC law and by OSHA violation penalties violation penalties violation penalties purpose for safety purpose for DOLI program grants to on -site suveys of high risk and employers in the hazardous ARP in order to s u b s t a n c e r e c o m m e n d industries or practices and occupations e q u i p m e n t designed to reduce risk of injury - priority visits given to employers with poor safety records - ARP to develop a premium rating system that provides a reduction in premium rates for employers that follow the safety recommendations made and an increase for those that don't. 16 same as S.F. 1820 • • • VIII) Safer Workplaces (cont.) Gov Hot Chin Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 not applicable 6 member commissioner of similar to S.F. commission to DOLI to make 1820 review and grants and loans approve grant to ARP employers applications for the cost of implementing s a f e t y recommendations 2) n o t not included not included, but safety committees included D 0 L I - to be established IIII 3) n o t not included included not included Wisc. s a f e t y 17 recommendations by every public under the and private assigned risk employer of more safety fund (see than 10 employees above) may include that the employer form a joint labor -mgmt safety committee provision for employer safety violations, increase WC benefit by 15 %, not to exceed $15,000; for employee failure to use required safety device, decrease WC benefit by 15 %, not to exceed $15,000 VIII) Safer Workplaces (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 4) n o t included not included 18 ARP must engage in extensive safety consultation with group members (see p. 23, #12) to reduce the extent and severity of injuries of group members, including on -site inspections not included 1 • • • IX) Eliminate Fraud, Theft, and Overpayments Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) intend to defraud made criminal penalty 2) recovery of overpayments not received in good faith same same same not included not included not included 3) n o t not included makes it a theft not included included crime for preparing or filing a claim for reimbursement for providing WC medical treatment or supplies that the provider knows were not m e d i c a l l y necessary or w h i c h intentionally or falsely states the costs of, or the actual treatment or supplies provided 4) n o t not included DOLI to establish not included included a WC fraud unit to investigate fraudulent and other illegal practices of health care providers, employers, insurers, attorneys, employees, and others related to WC 19 X) Promote On -Going Additional Reform Efforts Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) reconstructed WC advisory council to DOLI commissioner is chair commissioner to appoint members not included reconstructed WC advisory council to DOLI council to elect co- chairs - one business and one labor commissioner is commissioner is non-voting ex- officio non- member voting member gov, sen. majority leader & speaker to appoint members to 5 yr terms a s s i s t a n t commissioner of DOLI for WC to serve as executive director of council 20 not included not included not included not included permanent commission on WC (separate from DOLI) president of state's largest business and labor organizations to serve as co- chairs commissioner is ex- officio non- voting member not included same as S.F. 1820 executive director of commission appointed by commission (serves as state employee in unclassified civil service) • • • • XI) Retain Competitive Market Insurance System Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) A R P ARP changes ARP changes no changes changes - - shifts control of not included not included not included Bd. of Gov's to private insurers - establishes merit not included not included not included rating plan (10% db or cr) - rates filed by Bd not included not included not included of Gov not commissioner - comm. may disapprove a filing under statutory standard - a n n u a l assessment determined by Bd not commissioner - loss experience data reporting requirements by plan administrator - 2 rejections required for ARP participation not included same same 2) r a t e rate regulation no changes regulation - commissioner may same not included appoint additional actuaries 21 not included not included not included not included same not included no changes made not included XI) Insurance (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 commissioner may not included not included not included hold hearing on (retains current individual law) company rate filing changes or on rating plan change - standard is excessive, inadequate, or u n f a i r l y discriminatory r e m o v e s competitive m a r k e t presumption 3) L o s s , same not included not included • reserves, and MN premium data reporting required 4) Commissioner g i v en investigatory, examination, and access power to insurers books and rating assoc. 5) "All states coverage" allowed for ARP and state mutual fund not included not included same not included not included not included not included same same 6) mandated same, but no % same, but 4 bill % same, but 12% rate reduc. of 17% indicated yet is 11.3% reduction new rate filing same same same, but freeze freeze from extended from 4/1/92 to 1/1/93 7/1/92 to 1/1/94 • • XI) Insurance (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 7) n o t not included not included mid-term included cancellation notice applicable to trucker class. 8293 8) n o t not included not included commissioner of included commerce to evaluate truck driver classes 7219, 7380, 8293 for fairness & equitability - if not found to be, then comm. to make correcting order 9) n o t not included not included self- insurance included regulations relating to applications, audits, custodial accounts 10) n o t not included DOLI study - data not included included sharing on u n i n s u r e d employers 11) n o t not included DOLI to study not included included practice of employee leasing and declaration of ind. contractor status as a device to evade or reduce WC ins. premiums VIII) Safer Workplaces (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 12) n o t not included ARP must create a not included included program that attempts to group employers in the same or similar risk classifications for purposes of group premium indemnity and c l a i m s management 24 1 • • • XII) Miscellaneous Changes Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 1) Family similar (SAWW) same similar (< $8,000 farm exclusion or < $20,000 with ($20,000) liability policy) 2) election of same not included not included coverage for vol. uncompensated worker 3) increase same not included not included punitive damages against uninsured or not self - insured employers 4) exclusive liability of contractor/ subcontractor same 5) same, except similar to S.F. same as S.F. 1820 daily /weekly Holiday /vacation 1820 wage calculation - pay received & holiday /vacation hrs corresponding pay excluded included in calculation 6) PPD pd in same, except pd not included, but not included lump sum 30 days 60 days after current law same after return to return to work as S.F. 596 work (current law) 7) incr. burial same same same expense to $7500 8) Temp total same, except not included, but same comp. ceases 90 ceases 120 days current law is days after MMI after MMI same as S.F. 596 (current law) 25 not included not included XII) Miscellaneous (cont.) Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 9) Comm. or same not included not included comp judge has jurisdiction over distribution of proceeds in 3rd party liability cases 10) n o t liability disputes - not included same as S.F. 1820 included reimbursement plus interest at statutory rate (based on U.S. Treasury Bill rates) 11) n o t not included not included v o l u n t a r y included uncompensated worker in construction industry who renders services for joint labor /mgmt community service project is covered under WC law 12) n o t not included same as H.F. 1952 TT recommended included if worker laid off through no fault of employee from light duty job prior to 90 days past MMI - TT must cease again 90 days past MMI 26 • • • • XII) Miscellaneous (cont.) $ Gov Hot Chm Ruk S.F. 596 S.F. 1820 S.F. (4 bills) H.F. 1952 13) n o t not included DNR employees not included included who principally work outdoors in areas where exposure to lyme disease is possible & who are unable to perform the duties of employment due to that disease are presumed to have an occupational disease 27 • • •Minnesota Telephone 1612) 436 -7131 MINNESOTA - WISCONSIN BOUNDARY AREA COMMISSION 619 SECOND STREET, HUDSON, WISCONSIN 54016 -1576 Serving Our Sponsor States on the St Croix and Mississippi Rivers since 1965 Office Hours: 8 A.M. - 5 P.M. Monday- Friday February 26, 1992 Dear Riverway Landowner, On behalf of the Minnesota - Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission and my fellow Commissioners, I am writing to you to introduce a new project designed to benefit landowners and communities along the St. Croix River, as well as the River itself. The project is called the Land and Water Resource Management Project. It is sponsored by the Minnesota - Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission in partnership with the University of Minnesota. The project needs the interest and involvment of citizens and groups concerned about the River to be successful, and that is why I am writing to you. The enclosed brochure describes the steps in the Land and Water Resource Management Project that will be completed by June, 1993. At several points during this process it is important that we hear from you and other landowners to get your reactions to the research findings, your thoughts and concerns about the River and Riverway managment, and your assistance in developing strategies for the future. Each each of us is involved in the care (or stewardship) of his or her property. The actions of other owners, river users and agencies can affect the enjoyment and value of your land, and in turn, your actions can affect others. This project is an effort to understand how our actions affect each other and the health and beauty of the River, and to begin thinking about what we want for the future. I hope that you can join us at one of the first workshop sessions to hear early project results, and discuss issues or questions you have about the Lower St. Croix River. The meeting dates, locations and times are listed on the announcement enclosed with this letter. If you are unable to attend one of these meetings, we hope that you can participate in this project in other ways - -by staying informed through articles in local newspapers or other media, by responding to surveys, by attending other local meetings about the project, or by calling or writing to us with comments or questions. If requested, we hope to be able to send a representative to club or group meetings to discuss this project and get your reactions. Please complete and return the registration form attached by March 20, or call, to let us know if you will be attending one of Wisconsin Telephone 17151 386 -9444 s, the workshops, and to let us know about your interest in the project. If you have questions about the meetings or the project, or comments you wish to make directly, please call Sherri Buss or Dan McGuiness of the Boundary Commission staff, at (715)386 -9444 (Wisconsin calls) or (612)436 -7131 (Minnesota calls). I look forward to meeting you and hearing from you. REGISTRATION FORM Sincerp'v Bob Turrentine, Chair, Minnesota - Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission Name(s) Address Town, State, Zip Code I (we) plan to attend this workshop: (write in date and location) I am not able to attend these workshops, but hope to attend future meetings or participate in this project in other ways: I am concerned about these issues related to the St. Croix River and would like them to be addressed at public workshops: Land -use and building regulations and responsibilities of Riverway landowners. Recreation users and regulations Water quality issues on the St. Croix and its tributaries Soil erosion, wildlife habitat, and other environmental quality issues Tourism and economic development issues St. Croix history and cultural resources Others: (please list) 1 • • • • How You Can Participate We invite you to take an active role in this project and in the future of the Lower St. Croix River by: 1. Attending informative project workshops to provide feedback on project investigations; 2. Joining project scientists, river managers, naturalists, and others, in on -site tours to see firsthand the work that is being done as part of this project. Osceola on the St. Croix River by Mary Pettis Wirkkula, Osceola, Wis. FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT Dan McGuiness, Program Manager Minnesota - Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission 619 Second Street Hudson, Wisconsin 54016 Phone: 1 (612) 436 -7131 (MN) or 1 (715) 386 -9444 (WI) Funding for this project approved by the Minnesota Legislature M.L. 91 Ch. 254, Art. 1, Sec. 14, Subd. 3 (e), as recommended by the Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources from the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund. 3. Providing financial, volunteer, or technical support in our development of a first -class video production about "Stewardship of the Lower St. Croix River ". 4. Implementing an "adopt a river" project for a river reach or watershed segment important to you. ©1989 Mary Pettis Wirkkula STEWARDSHIP OF THE LOWER ST. CROIX RIVER • The Watershed • In the beginning there were no political boundaries. Upland creeks, ponds, and lakes drained into small streams. They, in turn, drained into larger rivers, forming a pattern on the landscape. The area drained by this system of streams and rivers is called its watershed. Only in very recent history have we named these rivers, mapped the landscape, and divided the watershed into parts by establishing political boundaries. As we settle upon, visit, and use this landscape, we make decisions and implement actions which may appear to us to change only a small part of the watershed. But each change in a part of the watershed has an effect on the whole. The Riverway In 1972 another boundary line was created, delineating and designating the Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway. This ribbon of land and water runs for 52 miles through the heart of the watershed from Taylors Falls -St. Croix Falls to the confluence of the Mississippi and St. Croix Rivers. This Riverway designation, established to protect the river and adjacent land areas, resulted in protective strategies, including acquisition of private land, scenic easement acquisition, recreation facility de- velopment, water surface use regulations, and state - mandated but locally - implemented zoning to control land use. We now understand, 20 years later, that river protection does not happen simply by designation or decree. Federal and state designations and their pro- tective strategies only augment, not replace, steward- • ship activities and support from local government, land- owners, and citizens who use and enjoy the resource. Stewardship of the Lower St. Croix River Protection of the river is a tradition that preceded its designation as a part of the National Wild and Scenic River system. People with diverse interests and from all walks of life have long expressed interest in this resource. During the last two decades, however, this interest has perhaps become dormant as people began to view the river as someone else's responsibility. It is now time to renew and rebuild the long- standing tradition of stewardship that local citizens, landowners and visitors demonstrated prior to Riverway designation. As a "stakeholder" affected by what happens within this watershed and the riverway, we invite you to become involved in an emerging project: Stewardship of the Lower St. Croix River. This project, being implemented by the Minnesota- Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission with assistance from the University of Minnesota, will: 1. Investigate and document how the Lower St. Croix River and its watershed have changed and been impacted by human settlement and subsequent land and water use decisions; 2. Evaluate how effective Riverway designation and management has been in protecting the resource; and, 3. Rebuild a foundation of "St. Croix Riverkeepers" and implement a broad -based program of river and watershed stewardship. PUBLIC TOWN MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS ABOUT THE PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF THE LOWER ST. CROIX RIVER FOR LAND OWNERS, LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, BUSINESS PERSONS, RECREATIONAL USERS, VISITORS, AND OTHERS At this initial series of town meetings about Stewardship of the Lower St. Croix River, project researchers, scientists and river managers will present brief summaries of their work, and we will seek your comments, questions, opinions, and ideas about: • The natural and cultural history of the Lower St. Croix River and its watershed; how has human settlement affected the natural resource base of this river and watershed? • The scenic qualities of the Lower St. Croix River and its watershed; how has the scenic character of the river valley changed? Have perceptions of what is "scenic" changed? • The designation of the Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway; How effective has the designation been in protecting the natural, scenic and recreational resources of the river? What has been the effect on local government, landowners, businesses, recreational users, and others? • The term "stewardship" means different things to different people; What does it mean to you and what would you consider essential components of a river and watershed stewardship program? Information will be presented in the form of graphics and slide - illustrated presentations. Discussions will be facilitated within small -group sessions and your comments will be recorded. Meeting Locations, Dates, and Times Sponsored by the Minnesota- Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission Locations Dates (In Chronoloaical Order) Times Afton, MN. City Hall Thursday, March 26, 1992 7 to 10 PM St. Croix Falls, WI. Saturday, March 28, 1992 9 AM to WI. Interstate Park 12 Noon Stillwater, MN. Thursday, April 2, 1992 7 to 10 PM City Hall Hudson, WI. Saturday, April 4, 1992 9 AM to Phipps Center /Arts 12 Noon Taylors Falls, MN. Thursday, April 9, 1992 7 to 10 PM Community Center Denmark Township, MN. Saturday, April 11, 1992 9 AM to Carpenter Nature Center 12 Noon Prescott, WI. Thursday, April 30,. 1992 7 to 10 PM City Hall Osceola, WI. Saturday, May 2, 1992 9 AM to City Hall 12 Noon Marine on St. Croix, MN. Wednesday, May 6, 1992 7 to 10 PM City Hall (Upper Level) To Pre - Register or For More Information Contact Minnesota - Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission 619 Second Street, Hudson, Wisconsin 54016 Call (612) 436 -7131 in Minnesota or (715) 386 -9444 in Wisconsin • • • MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: MARY LOU JOHNSON, CITY CLERK DATE: MARCH 13, 1992 SUBJECT: VERIFICATION OF MEETING DATE FOR FIRST MEETING OF APRIL This memo is just to verify for Council that the date of the first meeting in April is Wednesday, April 8, 1992. This change is due to the Presidential Primary Election being held on Tuesday, April 7.